GNU bug report logs - #68842
29.2; implicit declaration of function 'XOpenDisplay'

Previous Next

Full log

Message #23 received at 68842 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: ulm <at> gentoo.org, 68842 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#68842: 29.2; implicit declaration of function 'XOpenDisplay'
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 16:36:54 +0800

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
>> Cc: Ulrich Müller <ulm <at> gentoo.org>,  68842 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 09:56:59 +0800
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> > Po Lu, any comments to the patch?
>> >
>> > I don't mind installing this on emacs-29, if it's TRT, but the chances
>> > for us to have another Emacs 29.x release are slim at best at this
>> > point.  So I wonder whether you should bother.
>> 
>> I suggest cherry-picking 6c1413d5ef0d1fea639b0d8c83a0c0065d99359b
>> instead, because the systems where this flag is required have lapsed out
>> of existence.  It can't hurt.
>
> That's not something we do on release branches -- they aren't supposed
> to remove platforms or configurations.
>
> So I'd prefer not to do that.  Is the original patch suggested by
> Ulrich problematic in some way?  I understand that removing the text
> is easier, but assuming we don't want to drop support for GCC 4.6 on
> the release branch, do you see any problem in installing the patch
> Ulrich posted?

In that event, I see no problems with Ulrich's patch, as the configure
check is careful enough not to set emacs_cv_b_link=yes if that flag
doesn't work.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.