Re: Emacs for Windows

[Óscar Fuentes]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es>
>> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 21:40:23 +0200
>> 
>> Guile is not available as a native package. It depends on the MSYS2
>> Posix layer. The PKGBUILD and patches are here:
>> 
>> https://github.com/Alexpux/MSYS2-packages/tree/master/guile
>
> Btw, if there's no native MinGW port of Guile, then the MSYS2 port is
> of little use.  Guile is being used as an extension language in an
> increasing number of GNU packages (Lilypond, GDB, and Make, to name
> just a few).  Since you cannot link MinGW programs against MSYS2
> libraries, users will be unable to have Guile-enhanced MinGW ports
> unless a native MinGW port of Guile is available.

I have native and up-to-date gdb and GNU Make on my MinGW environment
and they work fine. You forgot to mention that Guile is an optional
requirement for those packages (not for Lilypond, but that's a very
different kind of software).

But let's pretend that you have a strong point here and that some
significant package requires Guile on its Makefiles. Just build it with
the MSYS2 Make, as you probably must do anyways if the package build
system depends on the Autotools or any other GNUism/Poxisism.

IIRC MSYS2 gdb works with MinGW binaries.

Your blatant hyperbole would imply that the Windows native ports of GNU
software that existed to this day are of little use, because MSYS2 just
aggregates and distributes it.

Finally, if there is no native port of Guile to Windows, maybe it is
because nobody cared enough to fight that battle. Many years ago I
looked at the Guile community and noticed an open hostility towards
Windows. Some file names on the source tarball, for instance, contained
invalid chars for the Windows' filesystems (`*') and they flat out
rejected to modify that little detail, including the funny individual
that chimed in to say that it was a "feature".