|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Removing support for Emacs unexec from Glibc

Removing support for Emacs unexec from Glibc

Posted Jan 29, 2016 2:53 UTC (Fri) by NightMonkey (subscriber, #23051)
Parent article: Removing support for Emacs unexec from Glibc

I know I'm ignorant of the reasoning and history here, but, somehow, it seems shocking that Glibc has code that exists primarily to support building Emacs. Seems very "wag the dog"! One level removed from saying "The kernel has special code to allow vi to clear the screen without leaving framebuffer glyph artifacts."

Don't get me wrong - I know all significant software likely has a sordid story in its history. :)


to post comments

It's been sour grapes ever since...

Posted Jan 29, 2016 3:38 UTC (Fri) by pr1268 (guest, #24648) [Link]

"The kernel has special code to allow vi to clear the screen without leaving framebuffer glyph artifacts."

And ever since the vi devs got the kernel folks to accommodate their special request, the emacs team has been jealously crying foul. How unfair that vi gets special support from the kernel and emacs has to settle for just glibc!

Just kidding. And being facetious. ;-)

Seriously, though, while I know glibc has its origins in the work of Roland McGrath and Ulrich Drepper, I'm convinced that RMS made lots of demands/requests etc. with regards to its development, seeing how emacs was/is his longtime pet project.

Removing support for Emacs unexec from Glibc

Posted Jan 31, 2016 4:43 UTC (Sun) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link]

it seems shocking that Glibc has code that exists primarily to support building Emacs.

Running Emacs, not building it. Every time someone invokes Emacs, it is fast because of its call to glibc's malloc_set_state().

And I'm sure it wasn't put there just for Emacs; the expectation was that other programs could exploit it the same way. It's generic enough, and the problem (programs taking a long time to start up because they have to load a bunch of stuff) common enough, that that would have been reasonable.

So I think the dog wagged the tail.

Removing support for Emacs unexec from Glibc

Posted Feb 1, 2016 23:17 UTC (Mon) by flussence (guest, #85566) [Link]

> One level removed from saying "The kernel has special code to allow vi to clear the screen without leaving framebuffer glyph artifacts."

Wouldn't that be the fabled “TTY layer” I've heard horror stories about? I've heard it eats developers...


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds