January 1999 - XEmacs-Beta - XEmacs Mailing List Archives

Re: XEmacs 21 /vs./ my keyboard: I want my DEL back 25 years, 10 months

Mike Berkley

How about a little historical reminder? When people were looking for Emacs on small machines like DOS, Coherent, Atari ST, and QNX, MicroEmacs was the most widely used and accepted alternative. MicroEmacs eventually lost a large number of users to MicroGNUEmacs and Elle, at least partly because the MicroEmacs developers kept diddling with the keyboard layout. I finally threw out MicroEmacs when it became impossible to reconfigure MicroEmacs to the old familiar layout. The lesson, don't diddle with the default keyboard behaviour, especially not in such a way as to make it difficult for people to get the old familiar behaviour.

1 participants
0 comments

Re: 21.0 vs 21.2 25 years, 10 months

Tor Arntsen

>Peter> If I want to track the 21.0 sources, must I `cvs update -R >Peter> release-21-0' in said directory? I currently have two copies of the >Peter> 21.0.6 tree, and I was thinking of tracking both trees > >I haven't tried that, but I think it should work. Check the >version.sh file after your `cvs update' to make sure you got the >version you expected. It will work, HOWEVER it's '-r release-21-0', not '-R'. -R means 'work recursively', which is the default anyway (and the 'release-21-0' will be interpreted as a module name and the command will fail). '-r' is what you want. Starting from an existing checked-out tree will me much faster than checking out from scratch, as only diffs will be sent. And adding '-z3' just after 'cvs' will make it much faster. I suggest 'cvs -z3 -q update -r release-21-0 -P -d' to get exactly what you want. >Martin - Tor

1 participants
0 comments

Re: 21.0 vs 21.2 25 years, 10 months

Tor Arntsen

On Jan 2, 4:31, Martin Buchholz wrote: >cvs -z9 -d :pserver:xemacs＠cvs.xemacs.org:/usr/CVSroot checkout -R r21.2.8 xemacs In general I'm not sure if -z9 is the best recommendation though, as it can put a huge load on the server without buying you that much. I have spent the last year doing remote CVS (including having my own servers) and I (and others) find that -z3 gives you much less load on the server and good compression as well -- you wan't normally notice any big difference from -z9. - Tor

3 participants
3 comments

Re: XEmacs 21 /vs./ my keyboard: I want my DEL back 25 years, 10 months

Karl Kleinpaste

Kyle Jones <kyle_jones(a)wonderworks.com> writes: > I think you're changing the subject. Martin's point was that > deleting backward must supersede the help function if they are in > conflict. I think this is a basic mandate, lest we be deemed > insane by the users. Sorry if you think so, Kyle; I thought I was right on topic, regarding what to do about conflicting keymap desires. If the users deem insane the desire that keymaps behave identically under X and in a terminal, then I shall be pleased to be called insane, and I'll find my own solutions...though for the record, I'd still like to know how to coerce keyboard-translate into producing a DEL keysym for a literal \177, and why the seemingly obvious use of keyboard-translate didn't work. As for "`C-h' is help" being something which threatened Stallman's health when introduced, all I can say is that you lived in a vastly different user population than I did when that came about -- where I was at the time, in an environment which included people using more HP than VT1xx terminals, nearly everyone I knew *loved* that mechanism. The idea of seeming to dispose entirely of the availability of DEL in a tty, as well as the help binding, both in the name of keymap purity, disturbs me greatly.

4 participants
7 comments

Re: XEmacs 21 /vs./ my keyboard: I want my DEL back 25 years, 10 months

Karl Kleinpaste

Martin Buchholz <martin(a)xemacs.org> writes: > When help conflicts with deleting backwards, deletion has to win, > since it is the more important operation, and f1 is available on > almost all ttys for getting help. Wow. That's an incredibly aggressive assumption. The fact that F1 exists has next to no relation to whether it is available. For me, my entire set of Fx keys is bound to an assortment of random xterm functions via Xdefaults; none of Fx generates a standard character sequence that gets to the application running in the xterm. That is, if one wishes to discuss "more important operations," I consider the ability of my xterm to provide font-switching, personalized canned character sequences, and selection insertions to be far more important operations than having two flavors of character deletion, a capability I don't recall ever having wanted.

4 participants
3 comments

[ERROR] pui-list-packages, file permissions 25 years, 10 months

Norbert Koch

Hi, XEmacs 21.2 "Artemis" [Lucid] (i686-pc-linux, Mule) of Tue Dec 29 1998 on apollonius.delta-ii.de just bugged out on me during a pui-list-packages (I had to SIGTERM it). The problem seems to be the wrong permissions of the index file: 200 PORT command successful. 150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for /bin/ls. -rw-rw-r-- 1 6101 6199 46327 Oct 16 06:47 package-index-1998-10-15-2.pgp -r--r--r-- 1 6101 6199 46353 Dec 1 02:06 package-index-1998-11-28.pgp -rw------- 1 6112 6199 46273 Dec 31 08:42 package-index-1998-12-31.pgp lrwxrwxrwx 1 6112 6199 28 Dec 31 08:42 package-index.LATEST.pgp -> package-index-1998-12-31.pgp This results in signal(error ("Package-get database file `/anonymous＠ftp.xemacs.org:/pub/xemac s/packages/package-index.LATEST.pgp' not readable")) Can someone please change the permissions? Thanks :-) Cheers, happy new year, norbert. -- Somebody should have told him that being a physicist, on a planet where the smartest animals hate being alive so much, means never having to say you're sorry.

2 participants
1 comments

21.0 vs 21.2 25 years, 10 months

Neal D. Becker

What is the diff between xemacs's in 21.0 and 21.2 series? I've been using 21.0b60 for some time. I'm wondering whether to try 21.2.

5 participants
7 comments

Re: XEmacs 21 /vs./ my keyboard: I want my DEL back 25 years, 11 months

Gary D. Foster

>>>>> "Martin" == Martin Buchholz <martin(a)xemacs.org> writes: >>>>> "Karl" == Karl Kleinpaste <karl(a)justresearch.com> writes: Karl> I find myself wondering how many keymaps would have to be Karl> examined, in order to hunt down all the <delete> entries, in Actually, not as many as one would think... Martin> A mode should probably examine delete-key-deletes forward Martin> to know what to do. Is there a better mechanism to allow Martin> user configurability? (Of course there is. But what is Martin> it?) That's the way the more intelligent[1] modes (ccmode, python-mode, cperl, etc.) generally do it. It's also a fairly reliable way of determining what the user expects to happen when he/she presses the "key marked <del>" vice what _we_ expect to happen. Martin> When help conflicts with deleting backwards, deletion has Martin> to win, since it is the more important operation, and f1 Martin> is available on almost all ttys for getting help. I agree with this 100%. -- Gary F. Footnotes: [1] "intelligent" being defined loosely as "does more than just simple one-character deletion in any direction when BS/del is pressed. -- "Yes, the airlines are cutting back on food service, as was dramatically demonstrated on a recent New-York-to-London flight wherein nine first-class passengers were eaten by raiders from coach." -- Dave Barry

1 participants
0 comments

21.2-b7 and -b8 have toolbars which "lag" somehow in Gnus 25 years, 11 months

Karl Kleinpaste

When running Gnus and entering a *Summary* buffer, the toolbar shown includes all the *Group* icons; tool tips in the minibuf when passing the mouse over these show that they will in fact execute *Group* functions. As soon as any article is displayed, the correct toolbar icons show up. Also, if one merely switches out to another buffer and back to *Summary*, the correct icons show up. Screenshots of the difference between 20.4's correct and 21.2's incorrect display are at http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~karl/pgnus/wrong-toolbar/, as seen immediately upon entering a group. I notice that, when leaving one *Summary* and entering another, the text cursor does seem to spend a lot of time in the *Group* buffer that I don't witness under 20.4. (I'm running an X11 connection over a 33K phone line, so the time spent this way is quite noticeable.)

1 participants
0 comments

Re: .elx? 25 years, 11 months

Hrvoje Niksic

Simon Josefsson <jas(a)pdc.kth.se> writes: > What happened to the suggestion that XEmacs should look for foo.elx > before foo.elc when executing elisp files? I see no good reason to change the suffix at this time. Both us and the FSF made incompatible changes to our Emacsen. I think the change will make more sense if and when we introduce a new compiled file format.

1 participants
0 comments

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

XEmacs-Beta January 1999