December 1999 - XEmacs-Beta - XEmacs Mailing List Archives

Re: XEmacs 21.1 CVS updates 24 years, 5 months

Jan Vroonhof

Gunnar Evermann <ge204(a)eng.cam.ac.uk> writes: > that should cover all version, right? I am planning to use gcc, but if > necessary I can also check whether we have some SGI compiler. I think at the very least both compilers should be tested on 6.3+. Alexandre uses gcc where as the SGI folk that have all these problems typically use the SGI native compiler.. > P.S.: In case it's not obvious: I do not normally use IRIX, therefore > I am a bit clueless about it... Same for me... That what I dislike most of all this dumping stuff it contains such a lot of platform specific black magic that isn't relay documented anywhere. I like what Alexandre is doing (i.e. making everything use unexelf.c) but seems to be very hard to do that without breaking all the platforms that were using their own private dumper. Jan

1 participants
0 comments

Re: XEmacs 21.1 CVS updates 24 years, 5 months

Gunnar Evermann

Jan Vroonhof <vroonhof(a)math.ethz.ch> writes: > Vin Shelton <acs(a)xemacs.org> writes: > > > From: Alexandre Oliva <oliva(a)lsd.ic.unicamp.br> > > Subject: unexelf.c is broken on IRIX 6 > > http://www.xemacs.org/list-archives/xemacs-patches/9912/msg00006.html > > As I said on review I don't really like this. at least not until one > of the other SGI have reported succes. The other way of fixing it is > much more isolated. I don't think stuff like this is appropriate to > stick into 21.1.x without _a lot_ of testing in the betas. OK, guys. I have some time today and can do some testing. we have the following SGI machines around here: ge204＠kennet$ for i in $LOCALSGIS ; do ssh $i uname -a; done IRIX64 ruby 6.2 06101031 IP28 mips IRIX64 kiwi 6.2 06101031 IP28 mips IRIX aura 6.2 03131015 IP22 mips IRIX psf 6.3 12161207 IP32 mips IRIX theseus 6.3 12161207 IP32 mips IRIX truth 6.5 01221553 IP32 mips IRIX chicago 5.3 11091812 IP22 mips IRIX texas 5.3 11091812 IP22 mips IRIX sippi 5.3 11091812 IP22 mips IRIX delta 5.3 11091812 IP22 mips IRIX cobalt 5.3 11091812 IP22 mips IRIX vectra 5.3 11091812 IP22 mips IRIX lotus 5.3 11091812 IP22 mips IRIX astra 5.3 11091812 IP22 mips IRIX sky 5.3 11091811 IP20 mips IRIX cyan 5.3 11091811 IP20 mips IRIX azure 5.3 11091812 IP22 mips IRIX royal 5.3 11091811 IP20 mips IRIX steel 5.3 11091811 IP20 mips IRIX slate 5.3 11091811 IP20 mips any specific cases you want me to test? Otherwise I'll just try normal non-mule builds of the current 21.1.8cvs on: ruby aura psf truth chicago that should cover all version, right? I am planning to use gcc, but if necessary I can also check whether we have some SGI compiler. If anybody knows anything else I should do (check patch levels, build 32/64bit versions or something like that) speak up now. I'll post more info when the builds are finished. Gunnar P.S.: In case it's not obvious: I do not normally use IRIX, therefore I am a bit clueless about it...

1 participants
0 comments

Re: Trouble in MinGW World 24 years, 5 months

Craig Lanning

New update. As it turns out, I had been using 'ash' as 'sh'. Once I made 'bash' the 'sh' it worked properly. There should probably be a FAQ or note or something added to tell people building with the Cygwin and/or Mingw toolchain(s) that if they have problems with temacs not properly processing .el files, they should make sure that they are using a copy of bash as sh. <time passes before queued message is sent> The cygwin version of ash runs the configure script fine, but chokes during the build. This is exhibited as the current working directory being wrong. The cygwin version of bash builds fine, but chokes on the configure script. This is exhibited as a failure to create temporary files. Craig At 09:10 PM 11/29/99 -0500, Craig Lanning wrote: >At 10:10 AM 11/29/99 +0000, Andy Piper wrote: >>At 12:12 PM 11/26/99 -0500, Craig Lanning wrote: >>>Now I am back to where I was several months ago. XEmacs builds temacs and >>>then has trouble loading/compiling the basic .el files. Somehow it is >>>getting the wrong value for default-directory. Instead of being set to >>>$XEMACS/src it is set to $XEMACS. (If I "cd src" and do "make", it >>>loads/compiles the .el files and dumps xemacs just fine.) >>> >>>Does anyone have any ideas about what might be happening and where I should >>>look to debug this? >> >>Didn't we resolve this? Are you building on drive C:? >> >>andy > >I thought so. > >When it was working, it was installed in c:\usr\cygwin-b20 with a snapshot >from July and had gcc 2.95. All I did was uninstall it, remove >c:\usr\cygwin-b20, and reinstall to c:\usr\cygwin-b20. > >The current configuration is > > Pentium II 350MHz 128MB mem Win98 > CygWin b20.1 > uname -a => CYGWIN_98-4.10 CRAIG 22.0(0.16/3/2) 1999-11-25 00:21:19 >i586 unknown > cygwin-inst-19991122 > cygwin1-19991126 > >mount => > Device Directory Type Flags > c:\tmp /tmp user binmode > c: / user binmode > d: /dload user binmode > >I have a cygwin snapshot from July on my laptop so I may try to copy that >over to the desktop machine. > >Any help would be appreciated. > >Craig > > >

1 participants
0 comments

Re: XEmacs 21.1 CVS updates 24 years, 5 months

Jan Vroonhof

Vin Shelton <acs(a)xemacs.org> writes: > I thought that Alexandre's patch was different from the one you had > rejected, although I did not look closely at it. Do you want me to > back it out of CVS? Keep it in for now. At least will get tested that way. We can always replace it with the Coin/Max version if that materializes. Jan

1 participants
0 comments

Please test the sneaky sumo... 24 years, 5 months

Jan Vroonhof

Thanks to heroic efforts by Andreas Jaeger the package patch queue is now effectively empty. That means that you guys can do what you know and love, n.l. test. Therefore Sneaky-R-us presents another tarball that was never released but yet is available at http://www.math.ethz.ch/~vroonhof/emacs/sneaky-sumo-19991204.tar.gz Caveats.. - It's 14.5 MB - The version numbers of the packages in this file are more or less meaningless. -This isn't a real sumo build. It is just what I get if I do "make install" in the package CVS tree. I think everything is in there, put please yell if something is missing. - IMPORTANT. This is non-mule build. This means a. The mule-packages are not included. b. All mule-only files that come with the normal packages are _not_ included. (I think the important ones are tex-jp and vm-jp?) So what has been in that queue (some patches have been in their so long they had cobwebs all over them) Methusalem patch: - After approximately a year the ps-print patch to make it believe in XEmacs > 19 has been applied. Critical Bug fixes: - jka-compr actually works the first time. - jka-compr, calendar and various other packages actually work under XEmacs-latin1 Super FAQ Fix: - pending-del.el was scandalously forked from the maintainer version to actually work with toolbar-paste Massive Changes: - Speedbar and imenu have had major updates.. - W3 has been updated. + A lot of other minor upgrades and fixes. What is _not_ in there (yet) - New version of cperl-mode (volunteer needed) - pgml 1.2.x (volunteer needed) - vcursor.el - Gnus 5.8.x (wait for higher .x?/Volunteer needed) - Your favorite package that you always use your own copy from FSF 20.4/20.5/pre-releease for instead of our version (volunteer needed) - de roe. Jan

1 participants
0 comments

Re: changing buffers with gutters visible resets match-data 24 years, 5 months

Hrvoje Niksic

Mark Thomas <mthomas(a)jprc.com> writes: > The following patch solves the problem of losing the value of > match-data when you change buffers while the gutter/tabs are > visible. [...] > 1999-12-02 Mark Thomas <mthomas(a)jprc.com> > > * gutter-items.el (buffers-tab-items): Wrap the function in a > save-match-data Thanks for the patch; I've now applied it to the sources.

1 participants
0 comments

Re: XEmacs 21.1 CVS updates 24 years, 5 months

Vin Shelton

Jan - I'm just trying to get some IRIX people to test this. As it is now available in CVS, perhaps some people will try. BTW, my work is likely acquiring some SGI machines, so I may have a chance to test this stuff out myself. I thought that Alexandre's patch was different from the one you had rejected, although I did not look closely at it. Do you want me to back it out of CVS? Vin Shelton <acs(a)xemacs.org> had written: >> From: Alexandre Oliva <oliva(a)lsd.ic.unicamp.br> >> Subject: unexelf.c is broken on IRIX 6 >> http://www.xemacs.org/list-archives/xemacs-patches/9912/msg00006.html >>>>> On 04 Dec 1999, Jan Vroonhof <vroonhof(a)math.ethz.ch> said: Jan> As I said on review I don't really like this. at least not until Jan> one of the other SGI have reported succes. The other way of Jan> fixing it is much more isolated. I don't think stuff like this is Jan> appropriate to stick into 21.1.x without _a lot_ of testing in Jan> the betas. Jan> However we do need an IRIX 6 fix into 21.1 - vin

1 participants
0 comments

Re: Redisplay patch? 24 years, 5 months

Jan Vroonhof

Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)iskon.hr> writes: > - int pixpos = 0; > + int pixpos = -WINDOW_TEXT_TOP_CLIP(w); > int bottom = WINDOW_TEXT_HEIGHT (w); > int start_elt; > > > Does someone recall what this patch was supposed to do, This patch fixes the problem where Gnus doesn't think scrolling helped when the top line got clipped. > and why it didn't go in? Me bad. I have submitted it now. Jan

1 participants
0 comments

Redisplay patch? 24 years, 5 months

Hrvoje Niksic

When doing cvs update, I noticed this difference between my tree and the CVS one: Index: src/redisplay.c =================================================================== RCS file: /usr/CVSroot/XEmacs/xemacs/src/redisplay.c,v retrieving revision 1.55.2.24 diff -u -r1.55.2.24 redisplay.c --- redisplay.c 1999/11/29 16:15:27 1.55.2.24 +++ redisplay.c 1999/12/04 18:23:32 ＠＠ -7409,7 +7409,7 ＠＠ point_would_be_visible (struct window *w, Bufpos startp, Bufpos point) { struct buffer *b = XBUFFER (w->buffer); - int pixpos = 0; + int pixpos = -WINDOW_TEXT_TOP_CLIP(w); int bottom = WINDOW_TEXT_HEIGHT (w); int start_elt; Does someone recall what this patch was supposed to do, and why it didn't go in? I'm pretty sure I applied it to my tree to test something, but I can't remember what it was, nor can I find it in my archives.

1 participants
0 comments

Re: XEmacs 21.1 CVS updates 24 years, 5 months

Jan Vroonhof

Vin Shelton <acs(a)xemacs.org> writes: > From: Alexandre Oliva <oliva(a)lsd.ic.unicamp.br> > Subject: unexelf.c is broken on IRIX 6 > http://www.xemacs.org/list-archives/xemacs-patches/9912/msg00006.html As I said on review I don't really like this. at least not until one of the other SGI have reported succes. The other way of fixing it is much more isolated. I don't think stuff like this is appropriate to stick into 21.1.x without _a lot_ of testing in the betas. However we do need an IRIX 6 fix into 21.1 Jan

1 participants
0 comments

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 December 1999