Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-Id: <200202270333.g1R3XCh02899@cate0-223.reshall.ou.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: cate0-223.reshall.ou.edu: jcast owned process doing -bs To: ehud AT unix DOT simonwiesel DOT co DOT il Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, emacs-devel AT gnu DOT org Subject: Re: Emacs for Cygwin (was: cygwin-mount.el, Using GDB in NTEMACS) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 26 Feb 2002 12:06:42 +0200." <200202261006 DOT g1QA6gw30441 AT unix DOT simonwiesel DOT co DOT il> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 21:33:11 -0600 From: Jon Cast You wrote: > I think that we need a CygEmacs - an emacs that will be compiled > with the real Cygwin ported gcc (i.e. without the > -mno-cygwin). I should probably point out that I am (slowly) working on such a port of Emacs. > CygEmacs will have UNIX APIs for I/O (files and > sockets), and M$Windows APIs for the display and the keyboard. This > is already done (partly) by the Cygwin port of rxvt. I used to agree with you, but the more I think about it, the more I think the ideal solution (bearing in mind that we are talking about a *Cygwin* port of Emacs) is use the normal LessTif toolkit support, and make LessTif work ``right'' from our perspective under Windows. (This would also allow us to support remote X connections, which is IMNSHO one of the major features X has over Windows.) Only if/while this is not workable/not worth the effort should we use the native APIs directly. > If this is too difficult, It's certainly non-trivial, but it's not difficult, either. All it takes is a grep for WINDOWSNT, and then a check of each of those ~ 206 occurrences to see if each one should read WINDOWSNT or (WINDOWSNT || CYGWIN). > may be a version of Emacs for Cygwin, that use only the UNIX APIs > can be ported. This Emacs version will be used only within Cygwin's > windows - Console or rxvt (Emacs in TTY mode) or real display (using > Cygwin-Xfree). This second approach surrenders practically nothing for the kind of user Cygwin targets once Cygwin-Xfree supports a rootless X server. So, I think if that approach is workable it should be pursued instead. > Any of these version will solve the 2 major issues of using Emacs > with Cygwin - 1. The files (names and attributes). 2. Running of > sub-shells in Emacs (file is not tty problem). It may solve another > problem that bothers me - running a client on the PC to a server on > UNIX. Right, because the alternatives you name don't affect the use of Posix APIs for these operations. (Although I agree that the primary purpose of a Cygwin port of Emacs is to get the Posix APIs for the operations.) > Ehud. Jon Cast LocalWords: LessTif WINDOWSNT -- 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/