Hi,
Here comes yet another status report from the project of converting to
GPLv3 or later.
There are two lists of files below. The first list contains all files
that are in an undecided state. Please inspect: Do we need to do anything
with them. If so what?
The second list contains all files that we can leave untouched and the
reason for that. Please inspect: Are all reasons OK and correct?
Are we getting close to the were an inspection of the xemacs-gplv3
repository could be performed? With the intent that it that is OK we
could merge back to trunk and go GPLv3 or later?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"CHANGES-beta"
"ChangeLog"
"PROBLEMS"
"README"
"README.GPLv3"
"etc/ChangeLog"
"etc/Emacs.ad"
"etc/InstallGuide"
"etc/NEWS"
"etc/ONEWS"
"etc/OONEWS"
"etc/README"
"etc/editclient.sh"
"etc/emacskeys.sco"
"etc/emacsstrs.sco"
"etc/gtkrc"
"etc/package-index.LATEST.gpg"
"etc/sample.Xresources"
"etc/xemacs.1"
"lib-src/ChangeLog"
"lib-src/README"
"lisp/ChangeLog"
"lisp/README"
"lisp/mule/mule-locale.txt"
"man/ChangeLog"
"man/README"
"modules/ChangeLog"
"modules/base64/Makefile"
"modules/common/configure-post.ac"
"modules/common/configure-pre.ac"
"modules/zlib/Makefile"
"nt/ChangeLog"
"nt/Emacs.ad.h"
"nt/Installation.el"
"nt/README"
"nt/Win32.cf"
"nt/lisp.ico"
"nt/site.def"
"nt/xemacs.dsp"
"nt/xemacs.dsw"
"src/ChangeLog"
"src/README"
"src/README.kkcc"
"src/m/README"
"src/s/README"
"src/s/freebsd.h"
"src/s/irix6-0.h"
"src/s/netbsd.h"
"src/s/sol2.h"
"tests/ChangeLog"
"tests/Dnd/README"
"tests/automated/README"
"version.sh.in"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
These files below are the files that we might be able to leave as
they are. The reason for why they need not to be changed is listed
after each file: (Some reasons are taken verbatim from private
communication or the "GPL version 3 source survey")
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"INSTALL" -> old FSF Documentation license
"config.guess" -> Part of config which is still GPLv2 or later. See "http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/config"
"config.sub" -> Part of config which is still GPLv2 or later. See "http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/config"
"etc/ETAGS.ChangeLog" -> BSD and GPL v2 or later
"etc/VEGETABLES" -> Not copyrightable.
"etc/XKeysymDB" -> MIT
"etc/ctags.1" -> Part of the etags distribution, which is not part of XEmacs.
"etc/custom/example-themes/ex-custom-file" -> Generated(!?) or GPL V2 or later?
"etc/etags.1" -> Part of the etags distribution, which is not part of XEmacs.
"etc/gnuattach.1" -> simple man link to gnuserv.1
"etc/gnuclient.1" -> simple man link to gnuserv.1
"etc/gnudoit.1" -> simple man link to gnuserv.1
"etc/refcard.ps.gz" -> Generated from refcard..tex
"etc/sample.Xdefaults" -> It is deprecated, so it can be removed but is only a three line reference to .Xresources
"etc/xemacs-X.ico" -> GPLv2 or later but there is not meta data for the file where this can be documented.
"info/dir" -> Generated(?)
"install-sh" -> MIT-style "no advertising" license
"lib-src/b2m.c" -> This is the version from GNU Emacs, so should be OK.
"lib-src/config.values.in" -> Generated.
"lib-src/emacs.csh" -> I don't think this even works with XEmacs ("emacsclient"), so I believe we can just delete it.
"lib-src/insert-data-in-exec.c" -> Compatible license.
"lib-src/mmencode.c" -> Compatible license.
"lisp/dump-paths.el" -> Empty file. Not copyrightable.
"lisp/term/bobcat.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt102.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt125.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt200.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt201.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt220.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt240.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt300.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt320.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt400.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lisp/term/vt420.el" -> Emacs version has no explicit license declaration
"lock/.precious" -> Not copyrightable.
"modules/canna/install-sh" -> MIT
"modules/ldap/install-sh" -> MIT
"modules/postgresql/install-sh" -> MIT
"modules/sample/external/install-sh" -> MIT
"modules/sample/internal/install-sh" -> MIT
"move-if-change" -> Identical to GPLv3 or later Emacs version
"nt/Xmd.patch" -> GPLv2 or later but only a few lines
"nt/file.ico" -> MIT
"nt/minitar.c" -> Public domain
"nt/paths.h" -> Generated
"nt/xemacs.ico" -> GPLv2 or later but there is not meta data for the file where this can be documented.
"src/alloca.c" -> Public domain.
"src/depend" -> Generated
"src/emacs-marshals.c" -> Generated.
"src/emacs-widget-accessors.c" -> Generated.
"src/intl-auto-encap-win32.c" -> Generated.
"src/intl-auto-encap-win32.h" -> Generated.
"src/libsst.c" -> Compatible license.
"src/libsst.h" -> Compatible license.
"src/libst.h" -> Compatible copyright.
"src/linuxplay.c" -> Compatible license. (MIT-like)
"src/miscplay.c" -> Compatible license. (MIT-like)
"src/miscplay.h" -> Compatible license. (MIT-like)
"src/nas.c" -> Compatible license. (MIT-like)
"src/paths.h.in" -> Generated.
"src/s/openbsd.h" -> Too short. (< 10 lines)
"src/s/usg5-4-2.h" -> Too short. (< 10 lines)
"src/sunplay.c" -> Compatible copyright.
"tests/gtk/UNIMPLEMENTED" -> Does notes need a license?
"tests/tooltalk/beeps.el" -> Too short. (< 10 lines)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Hi, I compiled xemacs myself and installed into $HOME/xemacs-without-ipv6-cname
I then made a symlink of $HOME/xemacs-without-ipv6-cname/bin/xemacs to $HOME/bin/xemacs
I untarred the sumo tarball from http://ftp.xemacs.org/pub/xemacs/packages/xemacs-sumo-2009-02-17.tar.gz and untarred it into $HOME/xemacs-without-ipv6-cname/lib/xemacs, which made a directory called xemacs-packages there.
When I run xemacs, I am not able to update my packages.
I go to Tools -> Packages -> Set Download Site -> Official Releases -> US and choose US Main.
I then go "update package index" or any other command in the Tools menu about Packages and it complains: "symbol's value as variable is void: allow-remote-paths"
Can anyone help me with this? Thanks.
--
✐Richard Cook
✇ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Bldg-453 Rm-4024, Mail Stop L-557
7000 East Avenue, Livermore, CA, 94550, USA
☎ (office) (925) 423-9605
☎ (fax) (925) 423-6961
---
Information Management & Graphics Grp., Services & Development Div., Integrated Computing & Communications Dept.
(opinions expressed herein are mine and not those of LLNL)
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
On 2/13/11 9:40 AM, Raymond Toy wrote:
> On 2/13/11 5:41 AM, Aidan Kehoe wrote:
>> Ar an triú lá déag de mí Feabhra, scríobh Raymond Toy:
>>
>> > Is it possible to build all of the packages from source using xemacs
>> > 21.5-b29? I checked out all of the packages, copied
>> > Local.rules.template to Local.rules and ran make. This eventually
>> > causes xemacs to die when building advice.el.
>>
>> It should be possible, yes, that’s what the smoketest does (though its
>> 21.5.29 binary is old). Can you paste the error?
>>
> Error attached. I'm using latest xemacs sources fresh from the hg repo
> yesterday. I'm attaching the Installation file, just for the record.
I also meant to say that in the decades (gasp!) of using xemacs, I've
never had a reason to do my own package builds. But I'm doing it now
because I've made a few minor changes to comint (sent to the mailing
list already), that are not yet in the packages. Therefore I made my
own git repo of the cvs sources so I can track my changes and not lose
them as I've already done when moving from one machine to another.
Is there a reason why the packages haven't moved to an hg repo like
xemacs has?
Ray
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Hi all
It's been almost twelve years[1] since I created a PNG version of the
XEmacs icon with actual transparency and drop shadow. I figured that I
should submit it before my copyright expires... Speaking of which,
since the artwork is a rip off from etc/xemacs-icon.xpm, same license
would apply I guess. Please find attached PNG and XCF versions.
Enjoy,
Marcus
Footnotes:
[1] -rw-r--r-- 1 marcus marcus 739 1999-06-24 19:25 xemacs-icon.png
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Vin,
Could you build a Win32 package whenever you find the time?
Thanks
Marcus
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Richard writes:
> I would be surprised if any Linux distribution does still use 7bit
> as default?
Agreed, but in that case I would imagine 8-bit characters are more
likely to be meta characters than non-ASCII, and there's no way to
determine what they are anyway.
> Thinking about it seems like current behaviour is somewhat dangerous
> if something as innocent as pasting a compiler warning may result in
> unexpected commands beeing executed.
I suspect that people using XEmacs in a terminal are likely to be
using compile or shell mode for compilation, in which case the paste
is actually a yank from the kill ring.
> Otoh I do not think that many people expect the true meta key work
> in a terminal.
I suspect that a lot of people over the age of, say, 45 do.
It's worth being conservative about defaults; changing them is likely
to really annoy a lot of people.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2011-05-24 - 2011-05-31)
XEmacs Issue Tracking System at http://tracker.xemacs.org/XEmacs/its/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue
number. Do NOT respond to this message.
518 open ( +4) / 249 closed ( +0) / 767 total ( +4)
Open issues with patches: 11
Average duration of open issues: 872 days.
Median duration of open issues: 913 days.
Open Issues Breakdown
new 186 ( +4)
deferred 6 ( +0)
napping 4 ( +0)
verified 53 ( +0)
assigned 151 ( +0)
committed 28 ( +0)
documented 3 ( +0)
done/needs work 24 ( +0)
Issues Created Or Reopened (4)
______________________________
dired-re-permissions doesn't match alternate access method cha 2011-05-24
http://tracker.xemacs.org/XEmacs/its/issue766 created anonymous
calc-store needs to provide itself 2011-05-27
http://tracker.xemacs.org/XEmacs/its/issue767 created stephen
[Bug: 21.5-b31] Sub-process fails in ginger/Cygwin native 2011-05-30
http://tracker.xemacs.org/XEmacs/its/issue768 created stephen
apostrophes in internals node names 2011-05-30
http://tracker.xemacs.org/XEmacs/its/issue769 created mike.kupfer
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
On 2011-05-30, Richard <rz(a)linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Otoh I do not think that many people expect the true meta key work
> in a terminal.
I do! So I have my xterms set with metaSendsEscape .
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
I just switched jobs and the new job uses and leverages emacs heavily.
I've sort of gotten out of the habit of using it and have been using
textmate on the mac lately (yeah yeah I know, I know). However, I've
been getting back into it and am wondering what the current status of
Choi's cocoa bindings for XEmacs is. I assume it's still in
limbo-land? Everyone here uses cocoa emacs (GNU) and I've been using
it too but I'd really prefer to get back to XEmacs instead. I know I
can run it with the X11 support, but thought I'd just check in on the
cocoa stuff before I do a full build.
Thanks!
-- Gary F.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta