Re: .emacs vs .xemacs vs .xemacs.el vs...?
Hrvoje Niksic writes:
Raymond Toy <toy(a)rtp.ericsson.se> writes:
> I regret not having followed the decision not to use .xemacs/
> anymore.
>
> However, since the decision has been made not to use .xemacs/, but
> .emacs instead, I'm getting confused. Are customizations going to be
> stored in .emacs now? What happened to the use of .xemacs (or was
> that .xemacs.el) to hold XEmacs startup code? Current behavior (b41)
> shows that .xemacs/init.el is still read.
This is turning into an xemacs-beta FAQ. No specific decision was
ever made. `.xemacs/' was never used in a released XEmacs version.
Customizations aren't stored to `.emacs' "now", they've always
been
stored to .emacs (and no, I don't like that). I sense that, if I
repeat it more, I think I'm gonna scream with frustration. :-(
Finally, this decision is not final. It is only a strategic drawback
before the impending release. If there is interest, we will revisit
the issue of `.xemacs/' in 21.1. This time it should be done right,
though.
Right would be to have a .xemacs file, perhaps, or is there
some reason to stay current with .emacs. I can see someone with a
carefully customized Gnus Emacs .emacs file being really unhappy if
XEmacs rewrites that file without warning. Fortunately XEmacs saves
the old one, but....
As I'm currently being e-grenaded or sniped (bomb is too
dramatic a word, but it's like one a minute) by someone who doesn't like
protests to isps of email spam, I might be a bit distracted tonight.
UUencode in the flavors presented to me don't seem to work. I
can post binaries in uuencode from Microplanet Gravity on the Windows
side and both the kde newsreader (very beta) and Netscape read them in
Linux. So it's not the format of the files I'm trying to read.
If there's a simple trick, I don't know what it is. If this
is by design, then there will be some alt.binaries groups that won't
approve.
Rebooting to Windows to post uuencoded binaries seems so
strange.
--
Rebecca Ore