October 1998 - XEmacs-Beta - XEmacs Mailing List Archives

installing packages from Sumo 25 years, 9 months

Sebastien Carpe

First i'm running 21.0 beta 57 (last version number on the ftp site) on cygwin32. Everything works fine, else i didn't manage to install package ... since i didn't want to have to wist my brain on efs to get through the proxy, i've dowloaded the sumo package. after unpacking it, i did a symlink from ~/.xemacs/packages to the xemacs-package directory. But after that, i do have some strange things : xemacs sometimes loads well with my .emacs, and sometimes not (complaining about turn-on-lazy-lock) and some functions (like vm) are not available whereas the package is present. Not available meaning do not load when it should (just like the old vm did when i hit the mail button on the toolbar), and some runs just well (like efs which load when i hit TAB in the find-file function). I'm sure i'm missing something, prolly some autoload to add somewhere, but i'm clueless about what it may be and didn't find any track in the package info file... thanx for any help, Seb -- Seb C. (mailto:scarpe＠atos-group.com) | Working for Atos at Lille, France *********************************************************************

1 participants
0 comments

Re: GCC2 merging (was "native language support now available") 25 years, 9 months

SL Baur

Rick Campbell <rick(a)campbellcentral.org> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org: > There was a lot of discussion amongst RPG, JWZ, and RMS around the > time of the schism and there were serious technical disagreements -- > like RMS' opposition to abstract data typing (!) of keymaps, menus, > etc. -- but many people have tried very hard to work with RMS and in > some cases have just found the task too daunting. I can try to (once > again) dig up my archive of the discussion if RMS continues to make > these ridiculous claims -- if someone else has it more readily at hand > than I do, could you send me a pointer and save me a trip through my > offline archives? ftp://altair.xemacs.org/rms-jwz.tar.gz This tarball is in the format of an mh (or nnmh if you're using Gnus) folder.

1 participants
0 comments

Re: Why using (push-mark) ? 25 years, 9 months

Holger Schauer

>>>>"SJT" == Stephen J Turnbull schrieb am Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:04:27 +0900 (JST): >>>>> "Kyle" == Kyle Jones <kyle_jones(a)wonderworks.com> writes: >>>>>> Hrvoje writes: >>> As I said, we're plain lucky that our users never notice this >>> gorgeous feature. SJT> Please respect the preferences of others. I don't feel as you SJT> do. So, why don't add a variable which would allow switching between the current and the proposed behaviour and a poll on c.x.e to decide which behaviour should be the default ? Holger -- --- http://www.coling.uni-freiburg.de/~schauer/ --- "Hey sister, have you heard? Some people stand like trees, without a word and what that means is that some people don't talk." -- Violent Femmes, "Never Tell"

2 participants
1 comments

Re: Why using (push-mark) ? 25 years, 9 months

Hrvoje Niksic

Rick Campbell <rick(a)campbellcentral.org> writes: > I'm not arguing that the actual change should be done yet (that > would be Didier). I'm trying to establish that the current > behaviour is far from obvious, so we disagree at the very start. > > To get as far as typing M-< or M-> an emacs user must already be > beyond what is obvious. Note that C-home and C-end also invoke these functions, and they are heavily used by users with Windows background. -- Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia --------------------------------+-------------------------------- A jury consists of 12 persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer.

2 participants
1 comments

Re: Why using (push-mark) ? 25 years, 9 months

Hrvoje Niksic

Holger Schauer <schauer(a)coling.uni-freiburg.de> writes: > >>>>"SJT" == Stephen J Turnbull schrieb am Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:04:27 +0900 (JST): > > >>>>> "Kyle" == Kyle Jones <kyle_jones(a)wonderworks.com> writes: > >>>>>> Hrvoje writes: > > >>> As I said, we're plain lucky that our users never notice this > >>> gorgeous feature. > > SJT> Please respect the preferences of others. I don't feel as you > SJT> do. > > So, why don't add a variable which would allow switching between the > current and the proposed behaviour and a poll on c.x.e to decide > which behaviour should be the default ? Because this variable would be worthless unless the new behaviour were default, and others would never agree with this. I don't know how my messages come out, but I'd like to stress that I don't have really strong opinions on this. I can certain live with the current behaviour. -- Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia --------------------------------+-------------------------------- Manic depression is cool... your body can make its own drugs.

1 participants
0 comments

Re: GCC2 merging (was "native language support now available") 25 years, 9 months

Hrvoje Niksic

Rick Campbell <rick(a)campbellcentral.org> writes: > To put the question back to you. What if Microsoft were to view > XEmacs as a spec and, without using any GPLed code, implement a > fully compatible, fully functional 95/98/NT implementation. I would be irritated, but that would ethically (or "morally" or however) be OK with me. Specifically, I definitely don't want Microsoft using *my* code. > It doesn't particularly bother me that XEmacs is distributed under > the GPL and I don't think it's avoidable given its roots. However, > I certainly encourage people to release free code into the Public > Domain or at least to use a less restrictive copyright than the GPL. I understand your point even if I don't feel the same way. Personally, I prefer GPL. > Stallman's lawyers convinced him that, if he has an assignment > paper for every contributor, all of the source would be under > his control, and the FSF would be able to sue. > > Be that as it may, I still believe that an FSF suit against > Microsoft would be a joke. Why do you think so? The NeXT did quit. > I am not a lawyer, so I don't know how to answer your sentence. > I know that Stallman didn't just invent the assignments; he got > the legal advice. > > It strike me as what I like to call ``a rationalization so good it > almost makes a reason''. Ultimately, RMS likes to be in control, > period. Yup. -- Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia --------------------------------+-------------------------------- - Now what did we learn from this? - I learned what my liver looks like!

2 participants
1 comments

I'm going into withdrawal 25 years, 9 months

SL Baur

Now that Art Bell has unexpectedly retired yesterday I don't have any radio to listen to late at night when I'm hacking XEmacs. :-( Are there any time travelers from the future or space aliens from another planet on this mailing list? I need my nightly dose of Coast to Coast ... Whimper. :-(

2 participants
1 comments

Re: Irchat contains strong Crypto.. 25 years, 9 months

SL Baur

Rick Campbell <rick(a)campbellcentral.org> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org: ... > irchat seems to contain strong crypto (idea.el). [1] > I thought Steve was already actively ignoring stupid US laws regarding > crypto export. I'm not sure if the intent was civil disobedience or > just the assumption that no one would really do anything about it. Both. As far as I know, no lightning struck the .mil people who had PGP available for public download for many months. > The former seems like a good idea. I don't think the latter be a good > assumption on which to base such decisions. XEmacs is small fry and we have done such civil disobedience in the grey area of Mailcrypt since before my time. It contains crypto hooks and thus is barred by the EAR. I'm rethinking[1] the issue now that I have to pass through customs early next year. cvs.xemacs.org is in Japan as far as I'm concerned. > [1] idea is also patented. > But implementations may be freely distributed for non-commercial use, > right? As far as I know. irchat will *not* be put into any InfoDock release. My official position on XEmacs packages (even those included in a SUMO tarball) is that they are optional only, not part of XEmacs proper and should not be considered part of XEmacs. Footnotes: [1] I've chmod'ed the tarballs on ftp.xemacs.org to 0 while I'm thinking.

2 participants
1 comments

Re: [PATCH] SIGPIPE redux -- please review 25 years, 9 months

Hrvoje Niksic

SL Baur <steve(a)xemacs.org> writes: > Kyle Jones <kyle_jones(a)wonderworks.com> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org: > > > I think the patch introduces a descriptor leak. > > Not according to my tests. I think you are right. Kyle, a question: if write() is failing, doesn't it mean that the descriptor is practically dead? Does it really need explicit close()-ing? > Unless there's an O/S which does leak descriptors, I think the patch I > posted is good enough. Yes, but please add a #### that marks it for improvements. I think code outside lstream.c really shouldn't play with streams flags that way. There should be clean way to achieve the same effect. Also, I *would* like close() getting called on that fd eventually, no matter what. -- Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia --------------------------------+-------------------------------- Then... his face does a complete change of expression. It goes from a "Vengeance is mine" expression, to a "What the fuck" blank look.

2 participants
1 comments

Re: GCC2 merging (was "native language support now available") 25 years, 9 months

Hrvoje Niksic

Rick Campbell <rick(a)campbellcentral.org> writes: > From: Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)srce.hr> > Date: 13 Oct 1998 22:30:29 +0200 > > What he means is: if Microsoft were to enhance XEmacs and not give out > the source, > > As a practical matter this would increase the number of emacs users > and not hurt the free software movement in the slightest. Huh?! You mean, if Microsoft provided, say, a fully functional 95/98/NT port and we didn't get to see the source, you wouldn't be incredibly pissed? > Several Common Lisp venders used (or so it is alleged) parts of the > Public Domain CMU Common Lisp implementation in their proprietary, That's OK as CMUCL is PD. XEmacs is GPL, which is the license specifically designed to prevent this kind of thing. > it would be very hard for any of us to sue them because of the > copyright being spread over many different persons and > companies. > > This part would be true regardless of any stack of papers RMS' > lawyers may hold. Stallman's lawyers convinced him that, if he has an assignment paper for every contributor, all of the source would be under his control, and the FSF would be able to sue. I am not a lawyer, so I don't know how to answer your sentence. I know that Stallman didn't just invent the assignments; he got the legal advice. -- Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia --------------------------------+-------------------------------- main(){printf(&unix["\021%six\012\0"],(unix)["have"]+"fun"-0x60);}

2 participants
1 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 October 1998