Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: From: Glen Coakley To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Subject: RE: Text editors under Cygnus Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:09:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > Glen Coakley wrote: > > > If you would like a lighter version (no X code): > > > > http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/windows/ntemacs.html > > (http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs.html) > > > > It doesn't run 'under' Cygnus but it does run on Windows > and the FAQ lists > > where to get a small lisp module that will teach it to > understand Cygwin > > mounts and paths. > > > I don't want to get into a "my-emacs-is-better" flamewar -- > both NTEmacs > and XEmacs are great packages. However, I do want to clear up a > misunderstanding: > > Despite the name "XEmacs", the packages built for windows and > for cygwin > do NOT require an Xserver. In fact, they don't contain the X code at > all. (You *can* build an X-based XEmacs for cygwin, but the official > package is not built that way). > > --Chuck Thanks for correcting that. I made an assumption about what caused XEmacs to load on my system. The 'lighter version' comments stands. XEmacs (OOTB) loads much slower then Emacs. I will stop guessing as to why. -- 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/