Am 02.11.2013 um 23:40 schrieb Bram Moolenaar <b...@moolenaar.net>: > Kazunobu Kuriyama wrote: >> On Nov 3, 2013, at 6:09 AM, Bram Moolenaar <b...@moolenaar.net> wrote: >>> >>> Felix Buenemann wrote: >>>> Am 01.11.2013 um 08:27 schrieb Kazunobu Kuriyama >>>> <kazunobu.kuriy...@nifty.com>: >>>>> On Nov 1, 2013, at 12:47 PM, Bram Moolenaar <b...@moolenaar.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Felix Buenemann wrote: >>>>>>> Am 27.10.2013 um 16:02 schrieb Bram Moolenaar <b...@moolenaar.net>: >>>>>>>> Björn wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:14 AM, Felix Buenemann wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Am 19.10.2013 um 18:54 schrieb björn: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 11:16 PM, Felix Bünemann wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 9. Oktober 2013 20:25:49 UTC+2 schrieb björn: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Felix Bünemann wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm pretty sure that AvailabilityMacros.h is available on all >>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions of OS >>>>>>>>>>>>>> X, because it's copyright header states 2001-20xx which matches >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the OS X >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10.0 release timeline. Is the os_mac.h code also targeting OS 9? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> case we should add a configure check. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, pre-OS X should be supported. If there is a suitable #ifdef >>>>>>>>>>>>> check for that, then it should be possible to submit as a patch to >>>>>>>>>>>>> mainline Vim. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK, I've updated the patch with a configure check: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/felixbuenemann/6150257 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This looks good to me ... but should we perhaps be checking for >>>>>>>>>>> "Availability.h" instead as that is what is used on Mavericks (and >>>>>>>>>>> earlier OS X versions did not need explicit inclusion of >>>>>>>>>>> AvailabilityMacros.h)? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The macros used in the vim codebase are defined in >>>>>>>>>> AvailabilityMacros.h not Availability.h. >>>>>>>>>> Availability.h has similar but not the same macros, so using it >>>>>>>>>> would require cluttering the code with even more ifdefs. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> OK. Well, then I think this solves the problem of compiling on OS X >>>>>>>>> 10.9 neatly and that it could be included in mainline Vim. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Bram, can you please consider this patch for inclusion. It should >>>>>>>>> apply cleanly (I just tried myself) and it automatically solves the >>>>>>>>> problem of us having to know exactly when this header was made >>>>>>>>> available. I've pasted it below for your convenience. Note that >>>>>>>>> Felix Bünemann wrote the patch, not me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, I'll put it in the todo list. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> How about the patch that Kazunobu Kuriyama sent on Friday? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Both patches should be fine. Mine uses a configure check to see if >>>>>>> AvailabilityMacros.h is available while Kazonubu Kuriyama used some >>>>>>> compiler defines to check if the header is needed, so his solution is >>>>>>> a bit more lightweight. >>>>>> >>>>>> Just to be clear: So including one or the other works, but I should not >>>>>> include both? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Though Björn Winckler has not replied to Bram’s email above yet, let me >>>>> try to clarify. >>>>> >>>>> Felix Bünemann’s patch is for building VIM as a Carbon application, while >>>>> mine is for that as a plain UNIX application, I mean, the latter lets VIM >>>>> depend only on universal libc and ncurses (and additionally X11) stuff, >>>>> not on any API such as Carbon or Quartz peculiar to Mac. >>>>> >>>>> That makes a big difference in keyboard response, but this is another >>>>> story... >>>>> >>>>> From practical and technical points of view, I think both of the patches >>>>> won’t conflict each other because his patch is mainly for os_mac.h while >>>>> mine is only for os_unix.c. No intersection, no conflict, though his >>>>> solution uses the configure script which affects the whole build >>>>> procedure, thus making it harder to evaluate possible unfavorable impact >>>>> on the build. >>>>> >>>>> Each of the patches will do for its own purpose. >>>>> >>>>> Hopefully, this clarifies the issue. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> KK >>>> >>>> Are we talking about the same patches? I was referring to the patch you >>>> send to the vim_dev list with the subject "[patch] src/os_unix.c (for >>>> build on Mac OS X 10.9 Mavericks)“. >>>> >>>> To compare https://gist.github.com/6150257 (my patch) and >>>> https://gist.github.com/felixbuenemann/7283250 (KK’s patch). >>>> >>>> I think they achieve exactly the same think and the only difference is >>>> that my patch uses configure to check if AvailabilityMacros.h is >>>> available, while KK’s patch uses some existing preprocessor macros. >>>> This means that only one of the patches should be used. >>> >>> I sent out two patches that combine them, using the configure check for >>> Kazonubu's patch as well. Please check it works this way. >> >> Bram, >> >> Please include my patch as it was; otherwise, it won’t work as expected. In >> fact, Patch 7.4.056 fails to compile os_unix.c. >> >> Let me clarify my point in another way: Felix Bünemann’s patch doesn’t cover >> the case where the configuration option -—disable-darwin is chosen in the >> build on the Mac. >> >> I’d like to remind you of Section 1.2 of src/INSTALLmac.txt, that is, there >> is another way to build vim differently from that of MacVim or alike. >> >> That’s why I sent my patch to vim_dev, not to mac_vim; the patch fixes a >> problem which is almost irrelevant to MacVim. > > Hmm, why is that configure check inside > "if test "$enable_darwin" = "yes"; then“?
It’s inside that block because it seemed the most appropriate place to put it when I wrote that code and I wasn’t aware of the fact that you can compile vim with disable-darwin on OS X. > Checking for header files should be done by configure. using #ifdefs is > bound to break somewhere somewhen. > > What if we move the configure check outside of that "if"? Or pehaps it > should go at the toplevel? That should work. > Looking at it again, I wonder why this doesn't use the normal way of > AC_CHECK_HEADER: > > AC_CHECK_HEADER(AvailabilityMacros.h, HAVE_AVAILABILITYMACROS_H = 1) > > Also, why protect the #include with the version check, > __ENVIRONMENT_MAC_OS_X_VERSION_MIN_REQUIRED__. What happens if we leave > that out? Well there is the remote case of Mac OS X 10.0 and 10.1 where AvailabilityMacros.h is missing > > -- > It is illegal for anyone to give lighted cigars to dogs, cats, and other > domesticated animal kept as pets. > [real standing law in Illinois, United States of America] > > /// Bram Moolenaar -- b...@moolenaar.net -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ > /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ > \\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org /// > \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// > > -- > -- > You received this message from the "vim_mac" maillist. > Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. > For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google > Groups "vim_mac" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/vim_mac/5kVAMSPb6uU/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > vim_mac+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message from the "vim_mac" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_mac" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_mac+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
