Re: Installing XEmacs under Cygwin

ht writes:

> ht writes:
>
>> I checked, and there are a number of other places where system-type
>> is checked for cygwin32, mostly in conjunction with windows-nt.  My
>> _guess_ is that most if not all of these should be changed to
>> include cygwin64.  Thoughts?
>
> So I wonder if we shouldn't actually replace cygwin32 with cygwin, and
> not distinguish 32-bit from 64-bit.  Neither windows-nt nor linux nor,
> as far as I can see, any of the other systems, distinguish 32-bit from
> 64-bit.

Sigh, on reflection there's no way to win.  Consider 3 ways forward:

 1) We leave things as they are in src/s/cygwin*.h, edit all the files
    that compare system-type to 'cygwin32' to include 'cygwin64';

 2) We make the suggested change, i.e. set SYSTEM_TYPE to 'cygwin' in
    src/s/cygwin*.h and _change_ all system-type comparisons to
    'cygwin32' to use 'cygwin' instead;

 3) We revert to my earliest patch, i.e. set SYSTEM_TYPE to 'cygwin32'
    in src/s/cygwin*.h.

None of these are without pain:

  (1) will cause obscure failures in existing user code which tests
      system-type against 'cygwin32' if they run the 64-bit version;

  (2) Same problem as (1), but worse -- happens if they run _either_
      version;

  (3) Doesn't break anything, but is misleading on the face of it.

(2) is clearly out, it seems to me -- we can't break the 32-bit
install for people who expect to update w/o pain.

I'm _slightly_ inclined towards (3), on the grounds that we still have
lots of '...win32...' names lying around which are actually perfectly
useful in 64-bit builds.

Thoughts?

ht
-- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: [email protected]
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]