[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gnutls for win32

From: Ted Zlatanov
Subject: Re: gnutls for win32
Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2012 11:38:33 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux)

On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 18:10:14 +0200 Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote: 

>> From: Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden>
>> Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2012 09:13:35 -0500
>> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
>> On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 06:50:12 -0500 Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote: 
EZ> FWIW, I've built GnuTLS 3.0.9 natively on Windows, using MinGW and
EZ> MSYS.  I will make the resulting binaries available shortly, as soon
EZ> as I'm done testing it with Emacs.
>> Do you want to work with Christoph Scholtes to make a GnuTLS W32 build
>> part of the Emacs W32 build?

EZ> Sorry, I don't understand: what is the "GnuTLS W32 build part of the
EZ> Emacs W32 build"?  Emacs on Windows can already be built with GnuTLS.

That sentence could be parsed both ways, sorry.  I meant: do you want to
work with Christoph to incorporate building GnuTLS into building Emacs
itself?  But it sounds like that's extra work you don't need :)

>> That would be terrific and we wouldn't have to tell our users to
>> download an extra DLL every time.

EZ> GnuTLS is more than just one DLL.

Yes, I mean we want to make the installation easier, that's all.  Right
now they have to get the GnuTLS binaries separately.

>> That allows us to make the choice of whether we should keep in sync with
>> the latest GnuTLS or refresh occasionally.  Testing will be harder if we
>> keep in sync, but has obvious benefits for both projects.

EZ> Unless there are known serious bugs, I see no particular reason to
EZ> upgrade to the next GnuTLS version, let alone keep in sync all the
EZ> time.  It adds unnecessary overhead to people involved in providing
EZ> the binary packages.  (E.g., it took me 2 days of my precious time to
EZ> build GnuTLS with MinGW, due to various complications and outright
EZ> bugs in the GnuTLS configury.  Why would I need to go through that
EZ> every month or so?)  Staying a whole major revision behind is indeed
EZ> undesirable, which is why I made the effort of building the latest
EZ> release.

OK.  In that case, we should build some tests of the GnuTLS
functionality in Emacs so upgrading is easier and less stressful.  I can
keep track of the GnuTLS releases and bump the Emacs support when we
agree it's worthwhile.  (You or anyone else can volunteer to do
this if you want that role...)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]