Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/05/31/12:06:39
Nicholas Wourms wrote:
> Is there a fundemental reason (now) why the xemacs people refuse to merge
> their cygwin packages into the official cygwin tree?
Yep. #1) They don't want to do it. (Understand that XEmacs consists of
about 100 different packages -- all of the lisp subpackages are
shipped/installed separately. The XEmacs folks even created their own
fork of our setup.exe to better serve their needs). #2) We don't want
to do it -- at least, nobody has volunteered to do so.
The obvious person to handle that -- since he's handling the cygwin port
of XEmacs that xemacs.org ships -- is Andy Piper. However, I doubt he
wants to surrender his current freedom (as absolute controller of the
windows CVS branch, the native windows package, and the cygwin/windows
package) and become subject to the vicissitudes of cygwin-apps...
Worse, suppose a third party decided to package a
cygwin-setup-installable version of XEmacs, even though Andy, the
official maintainer of all things Windows/XEamcs, hypothethically
refused to do so and would probably object to undercutting his own
cygwin-XEmacs.
This is a recipe for trouble; let this sleeping dog lie.
> Seems like this
> would be a nice package to have, espcially now that cygwin-xfree has been
> merged. Is xemacs one of those packages that could be setup to act like
> rxvt, where there is cygwin-console, mingw, and X11 functionality?
Nope. You can have
"native" build, with console and MSwindows GUI
"native" build, with console and GTK(MSwindows version) GUI (**)
cygiwn build, with console and MSwindows GUI
cygwin build, with console and X GUI
cygwin build, with console and GTK(X version) GUI (*)
cygwin build, with console and GTK(MSwindows version) GUI (**)
But you can't mix them, at least not yet.
(*) possible, although I don't believe it has been tested. You still
need an cygwin, X, build of gtk++ etc...
(**) theoretically possible, but I doubt much work has gone into it.
These configure options probably don't even compile. Maybe by gtk-3.0
and XEmacs 28.2 ?
> I
> recall you mentioning it as an example in your HFS thread awhile back. If
> so I think this package would definitely benifit many in the emacs camp
> (unfortunately I am "vi" person myself ;P).
There's already a cygwin package of MicroEmacs avialable in
setup-compatible form, IIRC. You have to add a "non-mirror" downloac
location to your download list, tho -- check the archives for more info.
> Considering the xemacs ppl
> aren't on the same page, maybe it is about time we get them on the same
> page. I'm sure all that is required is a few friendly inquiries from the
> cygwin maintainers...
Perhaps not. There's a certain amount of bad blood there...I've got
friendly relations on "both sides" -- but I don't want to wade into this
particular swamp.
A compromise position would be for some aspiring maintainer to provide
an "XEmacs-X" package for cygwin, which would be an X-based (GTK-based?)
cygwin build of XEmacs. That way, it would not conflict with the
xemacs.org version -- until they figure out how to get both (all three?)
GUIs to coexist in the same binary, which is probably VERY low priority.
Also, a cygwin-X-Xeamcs build would probably not offend Hrvoje, Andy, et
al...
However, having two different "official" cygwin XEmacsen -- provided by
different maintainers -- is again a recipe for trouble, and lots of
confused and repetitive questions on BOTH lists...
--Chuck
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -