From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
To: Christopher Faylor <me@cgf.cx>
Cc: rda@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RDA on Solaris and Win32
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:49:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <vt2brcwsu6w.fsf@zenia.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041213203220.GC27768@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Christopher Faylor <me@cgf.cx> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 01:12:41PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> >On 08 Dec 2004 14:22:18 -0500
> >Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hmm. It seems that, although RDA includes code for Cygwin and
> >> Solaris, that code is not actually built by default when one
> >> configures the tree in the normal way on those platforms. All you get
> >> is the librda library.
> >>
> >> This means that we can't know if regenerating the auto* files
> >> introduces additional build problems for that platform-specific code
> >> without first making RDA actually build it again. I don't want to
> >> extend the scope of my project to include making the Cygwin and
> >> Solaris native support code build again. But evolving the surrounding
> >> support will inevitably bit-rot that stuff. It's the classic
> >> "unmaintained code" dilemma.
> >>
> >> Ideally, that stuff were made to build again, but limiting ourselves
> >> to actions we can afford to take immediately, what should our policy
> >> be? Here are the options I see, listed in order of decreasing
> >> preference for me:
> >>
> >> a) Declare Cygwin and Solaris native support to be unmaintained in the
> >> README file, but leave the sources in the tree.
> >>
> >> b) Delete the Cygwin and Solaris native support. If someone wants to
> >> resurrect it, it's all in CVS.
> >>
> >> c) Put off upgrading the auto* files until Cygwin and Solaris native
> >> build again and the upgrade can be tested.
> >>
> >> How do other folks feel?
> >
> >I vote for (a).
>
> I thought Corinna Vinschen was maintaining rda for cygwin.
Oh! I'll ask her about it, then. She's been on vacation, which may
be why she hasn't spoken up.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-12-14 16:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-12-08 19:23 Jim Blandy
2004-12-08 20:13 ` Kevin Buettner
2004-12-13 20:31 ` Christopher Faylor
2004-12-14 16:49 ` Jim Blandy [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=vt2brcwsu6w.fsf@zenia.home \
--to=jimb@redhat.com \
--cc=me@cgf.cx \
--cc=rda@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).