bug#71801: emacs 29.4 windows binaries

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> CC: "corwin@bru.st" <corwin@bru.st>,
>         "tclwarrior@gmail.com"
>       <tclwarrior@gmail.com>,
>         "71801@debbugs.gnu.org" <71801@debbugs.gnu.org>
> Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2024 19:33:21 +0000
> 
> > > It seems to start OK but I get this warning repeated
> > > periodically (forever) in buffer *Warnings*:
> > >
> > >  ■  Warning (comp): x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc-11.3.0: fatal error: cannot
> > execute 'as': CreateProcess: No such file or directory
> > 
> > You need to install GNU Binutils, which is where as.exe, the GNU
> > assembler, comes from.
> 
> Why?

It's needed for JIT native compilation of Lisp.

> > > I haven't noticed other problems yet (with -Q), but
> > > is the continual emission of that warning expected?
> > 
> > Yes.
> 
> Why is that a good thing to do?

It isn't supposed to happen in a working Emacs installation.  Its
absence is like the absence of dired.el/dired.elc: it should not
happen.  So by default Emacs warns about it every time it wants to
natively compile a file.

> > > Clicking that black, square icon pops up this
> > > question as a menu:
> > >
> > >   Suppress `comp' warnings?
> > >   _________________________
> > >
> > >   Yes, Ignore `Comp' Warnings Completely
> > >   No, Just Disable Showing Them
> > >   Quit And Do Nothing
> > >
> > > I have no idea what any of that means.
> > 
> > It allows you to disable these warnings, so that they don't annoy you.
> 
> Sure.  But _what are_ `Comp' warnings?

They are the warnings labeled 'comp', as in the warning you've shown.

> How is someone to know whether they might want to (or need to)
> ignore, disable, or do nothing?

By reading the warnings, understanding what they say and mean, and
deciding what to do with them.  It's a user decision.  Isn't it you
that always requests to let the users the freedom of deciding how to
deal with non-trivial situations?  That's what Emacs does there.

> Expecting someone to decide which to do makes
> no sense if they have no idea what the meaning
> or consequences are (beyond not seeing msgs).

We expect our users to understand the warnings and make the above
decision, yes.

> Warnings should be for things that you need to
> be WARNed about.  If this is one such thing,
> then we should tell users what the "this" is.
> 
>  *****
>  WARNING - there's a FOOBAR in the vicinity!
>  Quick!  What do you want to do about it?
>  *****

That's an unfair comparison.  The warning in question did tell you
what was the problem: a specific program was missing or could not be
found.

> >   Warning (comp): SOMETHING
> > 
> > and the prompt asks about suppressing "comp" warnings, which fits the
> > warning ID.  You are showed 3 possible answers with the meaning of
> > each one of them.  What is not clear here?
> 
> Nothing is clear.  I'm a user.  I didn't build
> Emacs.  I see this:
> 
>  x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc-11.3.0: fatal error: cannot
>  execute 'as': CreateProcess: No such file or directory
> 
> Is that a problem?  I'm warned about it, so I
> guess maybe it is.  Is it a problem that I'm
> expected, and that I can, do something about?
> If so, what needs to be done?

What needs to be done is find out why GCC could not fine 'as', and fix
that.  Alternatively, you can just shut up the warnings if you don't
want to know about that.  See the text popped up by the GUI dialog or
shown by '?' that explains how to deal with that warning.

> > > I also notice that if I put point on that icon and
> > > hit RET I get the question in the minibuffer, but
> > > with the additional key `?' highlighted (no such
> > > option in the menu version).
> > >
> > > I hit `?' and this is shown in buffer *Multiple
> > > Choice Help*:
> > >
> > > Suppress `comp' warnings?
> > >
> > > y: yes, ignore `comp'    n: no, just disable      q: quit and do
> > > warnings completely      showing them             nothing
> > >
> > > That "help" text seems worse than useless.
> > 
> > It just repeats what was in the menu.
> 
> And you're just repeating what I reported.
> Why have the `?' and `RET' binding, which
> just repeats the text you're clicking `?'
> for help about?

It adds some information about the possible responses, something that
in the case of clicking is already shown in the dialog Emacs pop up.

> `?', like an `i' Information icon, should
> tell you something different, or something
> more, than the text you're already looking at.

And it does.  Of course, if you already clicked on the icon, you
already have seen the same information, but users can press RET right
away, e.g. if they don't have a mouse or don't use it.

> If you think about it for a few moments, I
> hope you'll see it's either misguided or
> it's missing something.
> 
> We get a "security fix" point release, and
> the first thing seen is an indecipherable,
> continually popped-up scary WARNING.  No
> help from Emacs to understand what's involved -
> what the danger/problem is, or what to do
> about it.
> 
> And your response is that this is all OK
> and expected?

No.  My response was quite more than that.