[Texmacs-dev] Re: [TeXmacs] segmentation fault

[Henri Lesourd]

Wolfgang Jansen wrote:

> Henri Lesourd wrote:
>
> > Wolfgang Jansen wrote:
>
> Someone must have worked out the configuration.
> This is the person who is responsible.

There is currently no person responsible
for the Sun platform.


> Or is your answer to understand as follows:
> We have done something, we offer this to the world for use,
> we even established a mailing list for discussion and bug reports,
> but there is nobody to maintain our stuff.

There is definitely somebody to maintain and
extend the software.

There is usually somebody to maintain the
stuff on most of the platforms. But currently,
not on Sun.


> Do you think that successful OSS projects are produced
> and maintained by bloody amateurs? Be sure this is not the case.

I have no time to answer this, sorry.


> > > In any case, it must be clarified
> > > that the bug is platform specific.
> >
> >
> > This clearly stems from your report, it's not
> > something I should myself state !
>
> So, if it was clear from by bug report that TeXmacs
> violated standards, why did the TeXmacs developers
> not fix the bug in the course of half a year?

Because, *as I said before*, these kinds of
platform-dependent things are usually solved
by *USERS* which can access the particular
platform where the problem exists.

No possibility to test: not possible to
write software.


> > We are not "providers". The way it usually
>
> You (or your colleagues) are the providers:
> it is _your_ announcement at http://www.texmacs.org.
> Why do you not accept the responsibility for your product?

As for me, except for really important
cases, I usually try to avoid opinions
about what the responsability of other
people is or should be.


> There may be many places where the result
> of the function is needed. Can the function simply
> be switched off? If it was so simple
> why has this not already been done?

Things are never so simple, one must spend
time to read the code in order to see if
changing it can break things, and spend
time to test the changes afterwards, even
if reading the code lead to the idea that
everything should be fine.


> Since you promised the placet,
> I did the necessary modifications.
> I add then in patch "quadruple.tar.gz".
What you sent is not a patch, it's a subset
of the sources tree containing only the
files you modified.

A patch is done by means of diff -r -U2 to
extract the differences between the original
version and the modified version of the whole
source tree.


Another thing is that your patch should
really *fix* the problems: it means that
there should remain no compilation errors,
and that the software should work as expected.