Bug 78024 – Consider building with --use-union-type=yes

Bug 78024 - Consider building with --use-union-type=yes

Summary:	Consider building with --use-union-type=yes

Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE

Aliases:	None

Product:	Red Hat Raw Hide
Classification:	Retired
Component:	xemacs (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	1.0
Hardware:	i386 Linux

Priority	medium Severity medium
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Jens Petersen
QA Contact:	Jay Turner
Docs Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2002-11-17 16:41 EST by Ville Skyttä
Modified:	2015-01-07 19:01 EST (History)
CC List:	1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	2002-11-17 22:08:24 EST
Type:	---
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Groups: None (edit)

Description Ville Skyttä 2002-11-17 16:41:02 EST

There are numerous bug reports about XEmacs on RH 7 and 8 on the XEmacs mailing
lists, with the resolution including a recommendation of configuring with
--use-union-type=yes, see
<http://list-archive.xemacs.org/cgi-bin/wilma_glimpse/xemacs-beta?query=use-union-type&Search=Search&restricttofiles=on&filelist=200211&filelist=200210&filelist=200209&errors=0&maxfiles=50&maxlines=10&.cgifields=lineonly&.cgifields=filelist&.cgifields=case&.cgifields=partial&.cgifields=restricttofiles>

Perhaps RH should use that option, I've personally used a modified version of
the RH8 XEmacs RPM for quite some time now which is built with this option, and
it has worked very well for me.

Comment 1 Jens Petersen 2002-11-17 22:08:18 EST

Yep, I'll try using union-types in the next package release.
Thanks.

Comment 2 Jens Petersen 2002-11-18 07:48:31 EST

21.4.10-3 was built with union-type.

Comment 3 Ville Skyttä 2002-12-18 16:00:47 EST

Uh-oh.  There's some new information about this one, see
<http://list-archive.xemacs.org/xemacs-beta/200212/msg00232.html>.

I don't know which is better, union-type or not, but I've never had problems
*with* it on Red Hat.  Just a FYI.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.