November 1999 - XEmacs-Beta - XEmacs Mailing List Archives

Re: [Failure] 21.2.20 under IRIX 6.2 26 years, 1 month

Paul Bibilo

Jan Vroonhof writes: > Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)iskon.hr> writes: > > > > Be Positive! Feel proud! You have just had the first obscure dumping > > > problem that the pdumper "fixed"! > > > > Provided it really is a dumping bug. > > He this is IRIX, it must be a dumping bug :-) > You may say that, but over quite a few years building beta versions of XEmacs on IRIX machines, I've only had dumping problems once or twice. > > No offense intended, but I'm always sceptic to that kind of > > "bug-fixing" where you change your configuration and the bug > > disappears. > > Of course, that is why I wrote the quotes in "fixed". Note that if it > worked before it could very well be the pdump changes that broke it. > I'd be surprised if it isn't to do with this, as up until the b19 version of a week or so ago, I haven't had any problems building. -- Paul

1 participants
0 comments

Re: spam from mailing list 26 years, 1 month

Hrvoje Niksic

Kyle Jones <kyle_jones(a)wonderworks.com> writes: > The usual course of action for mailing lists is to allow posts only > from subscribers. That's the way to go, if we care that much. I, for one, don't care that much. Like with spam filter, the problem with disallowing non-subscriber messages is that legitimate messages also get blocked. We've often had discussions that involved non-subscribers in Cc, and I consider it a very useful feature.

1 participants
0 comments

Re: `make beta': what it does and doesn't do 26 years, 1 month

Michael Sperber

>>>>> "sb" == SL Baur <steve(a)xemacs.org> writes: sb> Stephen J Turnbull <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org: >> Ought to be in etc/BETA. And useful targets for things it doesn't >> do. In particular, `make info'. sb> Hmm. That's a bug in `make beta'. As I understood it, `make beta' is sb> supposed to work like `make World' in X11 -- rebuild everything from sb> scratch. sb> `make beta' is probably obsolete now, though. No! Some changes (e.g. in Lisp object representation) don't get caught by just `make'. I've been bitten by that pretty recently. -- Cheers =8-} Chipsy Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla

1 participants
0 comments

Re: [BUG] `scroll-up' command broken in 21.2-b20 (AIX 4.3.2) 26 years, 1 month

Michael Sperber

>>>>> "MA" == ALTMARK <ALTMARK(a)de.ibm.com> writes: MA> On my Linux build of 21.2-b20, it works, too. But on AIX, I see this strange MA> behaviour which is quite annoying as scrolling should be considered one of your MA> 'basic rights' in an editor ... :-( Motif fuckage? -- Cheers =8-} Chipsy Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla

1 participants
0 comments

Re: `make beta': what it does and doesn't do 26 years, 1 month

SL Baur

Stephen J Turnbull <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org: > Ought to be in etc/BETA. And useful targets for things it doesn't > do. In particular, `make info'. Hmm. That's a bug in `make beta'. As I understood it, `make beta' is supposed to work like `make World' in X11 -- rebuild everything from scratch. `make beta' is probably obsolete now, though. It's original purpose was to make it easier to apply beta upgrade patches. That really isn't necessary now that source file dependencies are computed rather than hand done and the amount of code/documentation has been greatly streamlined.

1 participants
0 comments

Re: Package Numbers 26 years, 1 month

SL Baur

Andreas Jaeger <aj(a)suse.de> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org: > What's the philosophy behind the numbering scheme for packages? <major>.<minor> where <minor> is alphabetically sortable from 0 to 99. <major> gets incremented any time there is a major incompatible change and should be done sparingly. The numbering was introduced because there are so many different ways authors number their version and I felt that it would be intrusive to insist that version numbers appear in a certain format (or to force version numbers at all, for that matter). > I guess the number should get increased for each release if anything > has changed. No. The number has to change every time a new release is made because the MD5 hash of the tarball will change and make the package-index file out of date. Keeping the package-index file in synch has been a _major_ problem so far. > Or are their more sophisticated rules when (and when not) to increase > a package? The <minor> number increases every time a new tarball is created to put in the packages/ directory on ftp.xemacs.org. Please feel free to direct any other questions you might have about the numbering to me.

1 participants
0 comments

Re: [Failure] 21.2.20 under IRIX 6.2 26 years, 1 month

Jan Vroonhof

Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)iskon.hr> writes: > > Be Positive! Feel proud! You have just had the first obscure dumping > > problem that the pdumper "fixed"! > > Provided it really is a dumping bug. He this is IRIX, it must be a dumping bug :-) > No offense intended, but I'm always sceptic to that kind of > "bug-fixing" where you change your configuration and the bug > disappears. Of course, that is why I wrote the quotes in "fixed". Note that if it worked before it could very well be the pdump changes that broke it. Jan

1 participants
0 comments

Re: `make info' on 21.2.20 generates a bunch of warnings 26 years, 1 month

Hrvoje Niksic

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes: > Is this normal? Most of them are not normal; our documentation should be fixed. (There are exceptions, though.)

1 participants
0 comments

Re: [Failure] 21.2.20 under IRIX 6.2 26 years, 1 month

Hrvoje Niksic

Jan Vroonhof <vroonhof(a)math.ethz.ch> writes: > Paul Bibilo <peb(a)delcam.com> writes: > > > > Start "./temacs" and it will see the xemacs.dmp file is there and load > > > it. > > > > > OK, I tried this and it does seem to work. > > Be Positive! Feel proud! You have just had the first obscure dumping > problem that the pdumper "fixed"! Provided it really is a dumping bug. No offense intended, but I'm always sceptic to that kind of "bug-fixing" where you change your configuration and the bug disappears. If you're sure it's a dumping bug, great. But for all I know, it could as well be a weird memory corruption/gc/whatever bug that --pdump merely sweeps under the rug.

2 participants
1 comments

`make beta': what it does and doesn't do 26 years, 1 month

Stephen J. Turnbull

Ought to be in etc/BETA. And useful targets for things it doesn't do. In particular, `make info'. -- University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091 __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ What are those two straight lines for? "Free software rules."

1 participants
0 comments

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

XEmacs-Beta November 1999