Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/05/31/12:18:40
Robert Collins wrote:
> XEmacs uses a fork of setup. Someone who cares might like to suggest
> that they update their fork to a more recent codebase, or ... provide a
> setup.ini for cygwin users.
Well, their fork of setup does more than just unpack the packages. It
also mucks with the registry, sets up shortcuts, etc. (I know, our
setup does those things too).
Now, if the grand "data-driven" scheme is complete, THEN
a) if XEmacs updates their setup.exe to the recent codebase AND
b) they create a "package" that handles those items (but it can't
rely on cygwin tools to do its magic, because they uuse the same
setup.exe to install the purely native XEmacs; the end user might not
have any cygwin tools installed)
c) we figure out how to handle the relocation problem (*)
(*) We pick a cygwin root, and install everything under that -- but the
packages must follow certain guildlines: /usr, /etc, etc. They pick an
XEmacs root and install everything under that -- and have few
guidelines. Currently, the XEmacs tarballs themselves are packaged as:
bin/i686-pc-cygwin/
lib/xemacs-21.4.6/
man/
But the lisp packages are packaged as
pkginfo/
lisp/
lib-src/
etc/
info/
man/
And xemacs' setup "knows" to unpack those under
<xemacs root>/xemacs-packages/
Just like our setup "knows" to unpack -src tarballs under
<cygwin root>/usr/src
To sum up: this harmonization won't be easy -- even if the XEmacs folks
are inclined to do so, which I doubt.
--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 -