lesstif

[Brian Ford]

On Fri, 16 Sep 2005, Harold L Hunt II wrote:

> Hold up... am I not reading something correctly?  Was the binutils
> change that caused the problem ever reverted?

IIRC, it was a gcc change that caused the problem.  Although, there may
have been a binutils work around.

> If not, the problem will still exist.

It may, but...

> I never heard that the change was reverted,

I don't think it was, but...

> so I'm wondering why binutils being up to date matters at all.

See speculation about binutils work around above.  Did you try updating?
But...

> IIRC, with the binutils change in place,

gcc change

> the only way to address the issue would be to change nedit to no longer
> do relocs in now-non-writable data, which would probably take a week.

Here may be where the misunderstanding lies.

That statement may be true, but it doesn't matter because it would only
come into play if/when nedit was updated (ie. recompiled with gcc >=
3.3.1).  This is not necessary because of, or to use the new lesstif.
This is what I tested, but may not be what you tested.  Hence our
differing results.

> I seem to recall that I did everything you asked and it had some new
> problem (which I think was a crash on opening a file, or some such)

Unfortunately, as I stated before, you never reported this to me, so I am
unable to reproduce or debug it.

> Look, the history doesn't matter.

I'm not really trying to reproduce history, just to clarify enough to move
forward since our recollections seem to differ greatly.

> The point here is that I won't let someone release a version of lesstif
> that breaks nedit...

Fine, please define how to break nedit and I'll make sure it doesn't
happen.  Until we have a confirmed bug that is reproducible, you can't
expect me to go beyond a simple does nedit work to open, edit, and save
files type of test can you?

> now, if you're sure that nedit works just fine with your new lesstif
> build,

No one really can be, but it basically does...

> then that's the end of the story, and we can stop trying to resurrect a
> conversation history.  But, I mentioned that I would *like* you to do
> one more thing, which is to install nedit and lesstif on a machine that
> has no other modifications from you

I don't understand what this means.  Could you clarify what "no other
modifications from me" means?

I have made no modifications to the released nedit or to your
lesstif-0.94.4 source package.  They just work (TM).

> and just make sure that nedit still works and that you can actually open
> files; this might take 15 minutes, which is less time then we've spent
> talking about it.

Until I know what you mean by the above, I can't say I have done it.  But,
IWJFFM.

> If it works, fine, proceed...

I had planned to.  I have maybe just found web space to post packages, but
there is a fairly small 5M-10M limit.  We'll see if lesstif fits...

If anyone knows of a free site suitable for such, please let me know (via
private email if you so desire).  I don't remember anyone posting one that
didn't have significant issues with package names, space, etc.

> if it doesn't work, fine, but proceed with caution and don't post a new
> 'curr' release of lesstif until you've fixed the problem with nedit.

As soon as someone can identify a problem with nedit...

> Deal?

Agreed.

I'll be glad to leave my new version in test for a month or so to see if
anything turns up.  But, given the standard Cygwin philosophy for testing,
I expect nothing will until it goes curr ;-).

-- 
Brian Ford
Senior Realtime Software Engineer
VITAL - Visual Simulation Systems
FlightSafety International
the best safety device in any aircraft is a well-trained pilot...