Re: notmuch on w32

diff --git a/61/7c5b762c13537f00cd9bec0b0be50d33dfdd43 b/61/7c5b762c13537f00cd9bec0b0be50d33dfdd43
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..cb74207
--- /dev/null
+++ b/61/7c5b762c13537f00cd9bec0b0be50d33dfdd43
@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
+Return-Path: <david@tethera.net>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8AA431FC4\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:55:02 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]\r
+       autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id QobLy00r12bp for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:54:57 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from yantan.tethera.net (yantan.tethera.net [199.188.72.155])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CDFC431FC3\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:54:57 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from remotemail by yantan.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.80)\r
+       (envelope-from <david@tethera.net>)\r
+       id 1VXcbr-0002tN-OD; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 16:54:51 -0300\r
+Received: (nullmailer pid 7302 invoked by uid 1000); Sat, 19 Oct 2013\r
+       19:54:48 -0000\r
+From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>\r
+To: Claudio Bley <claudio.bley@googlemail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: notmuch on w32\r
+In-Reply-To: <87mwm71x91.wl%claudio.bley@gmail.com>\r
+References: <87mwm71x91.wl%claudio.bley@gmail.com>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.16+97~g6878b0b (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1\r
+       (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 16:54:48 -0300\r
+Message-ID: <87bo2lvxx3.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 19:55:02 -0000\r
+\r
+Claudio Bley <claudio.bley@googlemail.com> writes:\r
+\r
+> I wanted to use notmuch on MS Windows and thus have ported the code to\r
+> be able to compile with MinGW and MSYS using the GNU autotools on that\r
+> platform.\r
+\r
+Do you really need autotools, or was it just the easiest path to get\r
+things working on w32?  \r
+\r
+> Now, I'm in the process of streamlining the patches.\r
+>\r
+> As a first prerequisite I integrated gnulib as a git submodule and\r
+> added the Makefile.am and configure.ac stuff.\r
+\r
+I'm not really in favour of embedding gnulib (or any other library) in\r
+the notmuch source tree, using submodules or otherwise. I understand the\r
+gnulib authors intend it to be embedded, but the idea of staticly\r
+linking to something whose source tree is 87M gives me pause.  \r
+\r
+At least on debian gnulib is packaged as a seperate library; I don't\r
+know how usable it is in that configuration.\r
+\r
+I wouldn't say that we are minimalist, but we are making an effort to\r
+keep the dependencies as small as possible, so even setting aside the\r
+question of embedding, the cost/benefit ratio of this new proposed\r
+dependency would have to be discussed.\r
+\r
+> My question is: would it hurt your feelings if I'd rip off the old\r
+> build system completely and substitute it with an autotools build?\r
+\r
+We have so far avoided autotools on purpose.  For a previous discussion\r
+on build systems, see\r
+\r
+    http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.notmuch.general/700\r
+\r
+(and the rest of the thread).\r
+\r
+I don't want to sound too discouraging, but my initial impression is\r
+that your approach sounds fairly intrusive for a benefit (w32\r
+compatibility) that is not a huge motivator for me. \r
+\r
+Speaking only for myself,\r
+\r
+d\r
+\r
+P.S. in case it isn't completely obvious, I'm only discussing what's\r
+suitable for inclusion upstream.\r