Date:	Thu, 11 May 1995 12:14:59 +0200 (MET DST)
From:	Henk Spaan <hspaan AT swi DOT psy DOT uva DOT nl>
To:	Bob Babcock <peprbv AT cfa0 DOT harvard DOT edu>
Cc:	djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Subject:	Re: oemacs problem

On Wed, 10 May 1995, Bob Babcock wrote:

> >      I'm somewhat surprised that someone's still using OEmacs.  I've
> > assumed that everyone's using the FSF djgpp Emacs, and so I've done
> > absolutely nothing to make it work with newer versions of djgpp.
> 
> Installing a new version of emacs is likely to be an adventure.  I'll
> probably continue to use oemacs until I see a compelling reason to switch.
 
Right, as far as I know the FSF distribution does not have
a binary distribution provided for MS-DOG. I also do not think
that we should assume that all emacs users have the knowledge
or time (in the case of compile-time problems) or the djgpp-
package to compile this emacs-distribution.

Oemacs can be easily installed, provides faces and colour through
nicely documented features and options. On the other hand it
will lack compatibility for packages tailored to the FSF distribution.

I was enthusiastic about Morten Welinder's menu extension to the
FSF distribution. Moreover, some people took time to provide a
binary distribution. As far as I know there are still interrupt
problems and crashes in Windoze-DOS-box to take care of. I trust 
V2 will do this largely. Then I would switch from either Oemacs,
Demacs or Wemacs.

Better still: an X emulation library for Windoze (which is affordable!)
to make the latest FSF-distribution available for this platform and
provide it with the same feel as I experience on my un*x-X11 platform.
Of course Wemacs might be tailored to this needs by the advanced emacs
user, but still he has to switch between thinking in terms of different
distributions ...

But, can't have it all. For me it's graduation time and that means
I'm an emacs user. Tailoring it to my needs at this time is out of the
question.

In any case, I think there are some reasons why the FSF distribution
does not come through for all on the MS-DOG platform. Besides this
probably everyone got used to the idea that MS-DOG features require
a completely rewritten emacs to be functional, probably because of
the many emacs-clones written for MS-DOG and Windoze.

Just an analysis ...

Cheers,
Henk.

- Raw text -