>>>> "Scott" == Scott Blachowicz
<scott.xemacs(a)mail.dsab.rresearch.com> writes:
Scott> I sometimes run it in a tty (well...putty window on an XP
Scott> box ssh'd into a Linux box, with no X display). [...] It
Scott> tries to take over my shell-mode buffer as a tty and run an
Scott> xemacs within it (presumably not a separate xemacs process,
Scott> but my existing xemacs process thinking that my shell-mode
Scott> buffer is a tty that it has to operate within).
That's exactly what it is supposed to do. It looks for a GUI display
to connect to, there isn't one (that accepts connections), so it tries
to use gnuclient's controlling TTY. XEmacs makes up for a lot of the
design flaws in Windows, but working around this one would require
rootkitting your Windows box, and we aren't script kiddies.
Scott> Any suggestions on getting this to work?
fdisk comes to mind, then install an open OS with a windowing system
that can accept connections from the network. :-)
A more palatable alternative might be to run XEmacs locally on the
Windows box and use Tramp to remote access files on the Linux box.
However, Windows XP is not a properly supported platform; apparently
programming techniques that work for other Windows OSes don't work
there, and we've had a rash of bug reports which AFAIK have not been
addressed.
A third possibility would be to install an X server.
Scott> (like it used to with xemacs 21.1.8, and other versions
Scott> I've used)
Not on a Windows XP display, or any Windows display, it didn't.
Scott> Or should it be filed somewhere as a bug?
Nope. Unless you consider the single-user design of Windows a bug
that could be usefully reported to Microsoft.
--
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences
http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.