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
B. Joshua Rosen writes:
> I want to add one more thing. Regular Emacs doesn''t exhibitthis
> problem, tcsh shells work fine in Emacs.
Thanks, that helps a lot -- as I say, the code is quite similar so
that any difference there may be the cause.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Hi,
for said 'xemacs-packages' package, I would like to re-compile patched
elisp files. In the bootstrap case, I only have XEmacs installed, and
it looks like I need to add the .../lib/xemacs/xemacs-packages/lisp/*/
subdirectories to load-path.
Is there an XEmacs equivalent to the GNU Emacs
"normal-top-level-add-subdirs-to-load-path" function (see
<http://emacswiki.org/emacs/LoadPath>)?
Cheerio,
hauke
--
The ASCII Ribbon Campaign Hauke Fath
() No HTML/RTF in email Institut für Nachrichtentechnik
/\ No Word docs in email TU Darmstadt
Respect for open standards Ruf +49-6151-16-3281
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2015-09-22 - 2015-09-29)
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.
570 open ( +0) / 317 closed ( +0) / 887 total ( +0)
Open issues with patches: 13
Average duration of open issues: 2206 days.
Median duration of open issues: 2393 days.
Open Issues Breakdown
new 262 ( +0)
deferred 6 ( +0)
napping 3 ( +0)
verified 58 ( +0)
assigned 145 ( +0)
committed 19 ( +0)
documented 3 ( +0)
done/needs work 15 ( +0)
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
It appears that some releases of makeinfo, in particular 5.1, which
ships with RHEL7, have a small incompatibility with the way we (and
Emacs) read subfiles. Although this problem doesn't arise in makeinfo
6, it would be good to fix it. Fortunately Emacs has a fix, described
here (along with analysis of the problem):
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-texinfo/2013-04/msg00029.html
Could we have this done to our info.el, please? Note that it does
_not_ break forward compatibility to do this, i.e it works with old
(4.13), middle-aged (5.1) and young (6.0) versions of makeinfo.
Thanks,
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht(a)inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
I've hit a new glitch with an old history.
Per the documentation, and various old threads, the following have the
desired effect, in a case where no Italic style is available:
XEmacs*fcFontName: DejaVu Sans Mono:antialias=true
XEmacs.modeline.attributeFont: DejaVu Sans:antialias=true
XEmacs.default.attributeFont: DejaVu Sans Mono:antialias=true
XEmacs.bold-italic.attributeFont: DejaVu Sans Mono:style=Bold Oblique:antialias=true
But it doesn't have the desired effect on info-node, which is defined
as follows in info.el:
(defface info-node '((t (:bold t :italic t)))
"Face used for node links in info."
:group 'info-faces)
Adding
XEmacs.info-node.attributeFont: DejaVu Sans Mono:style=Bold Oblique:antialias=true
doesn't work either.
I _think_ the reason for this is that the above definition tries and
fails in an attempt to turn DejaVu Sans Mono:style=Bold
Oblique:antialias=true into a bold-italic version, but fails -- the
net result is a slanted DV Sans Mono.
Adding the following to info.el after the above defface fixes this,
but is it the correct fix across-the-board (i.e. for -nw, for Windows,
for people who don't nave a bold-italic ?
(copy-face 'bold-italic 'info-node)
Some relevant discussion from Stephen Turnbull in this old thread:
http://xemacs-beta.xemacs.narkive.com/dyuOtyWo/bug-21-5-b26-info-node-fac...
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht(a)inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
I'm afraid I no longer have the time to maintain either the MH-E or Gnus
packages for XEmacs. If anyone is interested in taking over one or both
packages, please let me know; I'll be happy to help you get started.
cheers,
mike
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Hi,
I am in the process of updating the pkgsrc 'editors/xemacs-packages'
pkg. While trying out the vc git support, I ran into issue 682
<http://tracker.xemacs.org/XEmacs/its/issue682> which the report claims
fixed. But the vc package installed is still v1.48, and the issue is
present.
The report claims the proposed "fix" isn't; there is another, earlier
patch at
<http://xemacs-beta.xemacs.narkive.com/khCckwa3/package-maintainers-heads-up>.
Is there a newer, fixed version of vc than the one in the stable
packages, and if yes, where can I find it?
Cheerio,
hauke
--
The ASCII Ribbon Campaign Hauke Fath
() No HTML/RTF in email Institut für Nachrichtentechnik
/\ No Word docs in email TU Darmstadt
Respect for open standards Ruf +49-6151-16-3281
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta