Re: Emacs vista build failures

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:34:58 +0200
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> >> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
> >> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
> >> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:24:38 +0200
> >> 
> >> Yes, since COMMAND.COM and CMD.EXE behave quite differently, and also
> >> differently on different versions of Windows.
> >
> > And zsh behaves differently from Bash which behaves differently from
> > the Borne shell.
> 
> Not in the basic Bourne shell features.

And COMMAND.COM behaves like CMD.EXE ``in the basic DOS shell
features''.

This can go on forever, you know.  Your bias and lack of objective
comparison are obvious.  No need to continue.

> >> So tell me: How to you quote the word (written as Lisp string) 
> >> "\"goof\" " to the typical Windows shell?
> >
> > See the Emacs makefiles for Windows.
> 
> They don't quote such words.

Yes, they do, see for example `check-declare' in lisp/makefile.w32-in.

> I have worked with DOS beginning with version 1.0 when they were still
> mainly working with FCBs rather than file descriptors, and I have worked
> with CP/M, and I have worked with UNIX on various processors and OS/2.
> I have done quite a bit of assembly and system programming in all of
> those systems (many of that for pay), so I know a lot of the inheritage,
> memory and system layouts, and I know a lot of the implementations, and
> what system calls were done with what sort of data structures when what
> sort of features were implemented imitating features from elsewhere.

Sorry, I'm not interested in a pissing contest.