[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req.
From: |
Óscar Fuentes |
Subject: |
Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req. |
Date: |
Fri, 03 Jan 2014 22:38:35 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
>> IIUC you invoked MSYS `make' from MSYSGit `bash'. As I said multiple
>> times, that's not expected to work.
>
> Right, and that's why I keep the two segregated. That was all I was
> saying from day one: it's a PITA to have two similar, but incompatible
> environments. E.g., I cannot build a package from the same shell
> where I "git pull" it.
As already mentioned, you can `git pull' on a MSYS shell, so it is false
that you can't `make' on the same shell that you did the `pull'
operation.
>> No, you didn't. As git.exe does not depend on MSYS.dll, the problems you
>> experienced with `make' shouldn't happen. And, indeed, invoking MSYSGit
>> git.exe from a MSYS terminal worked fine for the commands I mentioned
>> above.
>
> Until that git.exe invokes a sub-command that needs Bash or Perl, and
> will then invoke its own Bash pr Perl that need an incompatible
> msys.dll (and other DLLs, like libiconv).
Curiously enough, `git pull' seems to be a Perl script (the executables
and scripts are on Git/libexec/git-core.) But it works from MSYS, hence
somehow the problem is not so serious.
I suggest that for the time being we stop worrying about what unkown
problems might be lurking and wait for something concrete to
materialize.
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., (continued)
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/02
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req.,
Óscar Fuentes <=
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/04
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/04
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/04
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/04
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/04
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/04
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/04
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., David De La Harpe Golden, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/03
- Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req., Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/02