X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com RazorGate-KAS: Status: not_detected RazorGate-KAS: Rate: 0 RazorGate-KAS: Envelope from: RazorGate-KAS: Version: 5.5.3 RazorGate-KAS: LuaCore: 80 2014-11-10_18-01-23 260f8afb9361da3c7edfd3a8e3a4ca908191ad29 RazorGate-KAS: Lua profiles 69136 [Nov 12 2014] RazorGate-KAS: Method: none Subject: Re: Is DJGPP Emacs still wanted? To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com References: <83bn4uxben DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <837ffix9o7 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <5722455F DOT 3020906 AT gmx DOT de> <831t5py22r DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <57228FEC DOT 9080408 AT gmx DOT de> <83mvocx0iw DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> From: "Andris Pavenis (andris DOT pavenis AT iki DOT fi) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" Message-ID: <57244D36.4040103@iki.fi> Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 09:14:14 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83mvocx0iw.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On 04/29/2016 11:49 AM, Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com] wrote: >> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:34:20 +0200 >> From: "Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" >> >> If gdb64 is not good enough to debug emacs issues, then we have reach the end >> of the road of the DJGPP port of emacs. I have neither the skills nor the time >> to fix broken coff debug support neither in binutils nor in gdb. > This raises an issue that is IMO important to discuss. It is > certainly important for me personally. Here it is: > > Do we still want/need to build latest Emacs versions with DJGPP? > > So please tell me if these efforts are still needed. Does anyone use > a DJGPP Emacs for their routine work, on DJGPP or anything else? > Because if no one needs this port, all my efforts to maintain it are > just a huge waste of time. > > We are all volunteers here. But if a volunteer's work is unused, > he/she should invest their energy elsewhere. > > Please respond. If no one responds to these questions, I will > conclude that the DJGPP port of Emacs is not needed anymore, and will > stop trying to keep it in working order. > I'm also belong to those who do not use DJGPP port of Emacs even if I'm using regularly Emacs at work, also for own projects. I have tried it (DJGPP port) really long time ago (if I remember correctly) but gave up then. Changing to use Emacs take some time and then I preferred RHIDE and some other similar editors at that time. Much later I changed to use Emacs but mostly under Linux and rather seldom under Windows and never Emacs DJGPP port. Andris PS. Similarly I have abandoned attempts to maintain RHIDE about 10 years ago. Adapting it to new versions of gcc and especially gdb become then more and more difficult.