April 1999 - XEmacs-Beta - XEmacs Mailing List Archives

Re: Compile Failure in Latest CVS Sources for 21.2 25 years

Hrvoje Niksic

Vin Shelton <acs(a)xemacs.org> writes: > I can't build 21.2 from the latest CVS sources, due to dependencies > on puresize-adjust.h.: > > make[1]: *** No rule to make target `puresize-adjust.h', needed by > `alloc.o'. Stop. You have to rebuild the dependencies. I think I've done it with `make depend' followed by a reinvocation of `config.status'.

2 participants
1 comments

Compile Failure in Latest CVS Sources for 21.2 25 years

Vin Shelton

I can't build 21.2 from the latest CVS sources, due to dependencies on puresize-adjust.h.: make[1]: *** No rule to make target `puresize-adjust.h', needed by `alloc.o'. Stop. vin

2 participants
1 comments

[bug] Dirty echo area message after dumping 25 years

Hrvoje Niksic

I'm writing this in a purespace-free XEmacs. Whee! A bug: the first message XEmacs shows is "Dumping under the name xemacs". Obviously, this is an artifact of the dumping process -- echo area should get cleared priored to dumping, but it doesn't.

2 participants
1 comments

Re: bug package vc 1.17, function vc-directory 25 years

Jan Vroonhof

Ullrich Hafner <hafner(a)informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de> writes: > /home/hafner/work/GTKstep: > list wildcard > -rw-r--r-- 1 (hafner) 935 Mar 8 17:03 configure.in Did the older vc.el's not remove the "list wildcard" line? > Any help is appreciated. Try singles stepping though vc-directory to see at what point the mangling goes wrong. There probably was a slight change in the dired format. Jan

1 participants
0 comments

Re: [mswindows] Sh-insert pastes strangely without zmacs-regions 25 years

Andy Piper

At 09:14 AM 4/20/99 -0700, Samuel Mikes wrote: I am working on a patch for this. I know what the problem is - I just haven't got round to fixing it properly. andy

1 participants
0 comments

Re: Perl embedding: trial balloon 25 years

Pete Ware

John, I'm a long time member of the xemacs beta developers. You are stepping into a group with a long and rich history of discussion about what to do tomorrow. Everyone has their own perspective on what is important -- which is exactly why progress gets made and XEmacs keeps getting better. In spite of first appearances, what you are getting is not a "no way in hell" answer. Every, and I mean every, new idea goes through this process. You just haven't seen the complete, idea life cycle as practiced on xemacs-beta. Good, well thought out pieces emerge from this initial phase. Bad ideas fade away and everyone is saved a lot of wasted effort. You are getting some extra heat because, to be honest, we've had a lot (like nearly a weekly occurance) of cranks that want to convert Emacs into perl or otherwise throw out millions of lines of perfectly good Emacs Lisp code and replace it with the language du jour. That's not going to happen. Some of us don't care for Perl as a language, or don't like/use Mule, or hate Windows but that doesn't stop such things from being added. It is probably reasonable to assume your changes will get incorporated to the core of XEmacs if: (a) they are not Perl specific but can be used to add any extension language; (b) provide a better abstraction then what is being done (we like abstraction); (c) don't have an adverse affect on XEmacs if/when you dissappear and no one else comes forward to support the Perl extensions; (d) the Perl part is completely and utterly isolated to keep it from infecting the Emacs Lisp part. Advice: 1. Subscribe to xemacs-beta 2. Fix bugs so we start to know and trust you. 3. Submit patches that are generic to any extension language 4. Submit perl as a proof of concept. 5. Figure out a way to get other perl people helping you but not bugging us (xemacs-perl(a)xemacs.org?). Good luck, --pete -- Pete Ware ware(a)cis.ohio-state.edu The Ohio State University, CIS Dept http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~ware 2015 Neil Ave, Dreese Labs 774, w/ (614) 292-8501 Columbus, OH 43210 h/ (614) 488-8516

1 participants
0 comments

bug package vc 1.17, function vc-directory 25 years

Ullrich Hafner

Hi, I've just installed XEmacs 21.0 beta67 and it seems to be that the problem of recursive directory processing in function vc-directory still doesn't work. When using code prior to XEmacs 20.4 (vc version 5.6) I get the following correct output: /home/hafner/work/GTKstep: list wildcard -rw-r--r-- 1 (hafner) 935 Mar 8 17:03 configure.in /home/hafner/work/GTKstep/step: list wildcard -rw-r--r-- 1 (hafner) 64133 Feb 19 00:26 step_theme_draw.c /home/hafner/work/GTKstep/step/Theme/gtk: list wildcard -rw-r--r-- 1 (hafner) 981 Mar 8 17:02 gtkrc However, XEmacs-21.0b67 and package vc 1.17 gives me the output /home/hafner/work/GTKstep: (hafner) inf2 64133 Feb 19 00:26 step_theme_draw.c /home/hafner/work/GTKstep/step/Theme/gtk: list wildcard -rw-r--r-- 1 hafner inf2 981 Mar 8 17:02 gtkrc and some <<No file on this line>> messages. Any help is appreciated. Ullrich -- Ullrich Hafner <hafner(a)bigfoot.de>, http://www.bigfoot.com/~uhafner

1 participants
0 comments

Re: Perl embedding: trial balloon 25 years

Raymond Toy

>>>>> "Geoffrey" == Geoffrey Furnish <furnish(a)actel.com> writes: Geoffrey> So you don't like Perl. Fine. Who cares what you languages you like, Geoffrey> anyway? So you don't want XEmacs hooked up to too many different Geoffrey> things. Tough. It's going to happen whether you like it or not. Geoffrey> Maybe you've forgotten what the GPL is all about? After seeing what Geoffrey> has been said to John, I feel certain that my own purposes in Geoffrey> inquiring about Elisp/C extension coupling would not impress you In the decades that emacs has been around, there's only been two forks that I know of: epoch and xemacs, and epoch is dead. I think that means forking emacs into something viable and maintainable is extremely hard. In fact it never ceases to amaze me what xemacs can do. And the effort that volunteers put into it to keep it going. My sincerest thanks to them for allowing me to use such a wonderful editor.[1] Geoffrey> either. So what's your goal? To drive away people toting uncouth Geoffrey> baggage? Or to make XEmacs a flexible and powerful work environment? You mean XEmacs isn't already a flexible and powerful work environment? How does adding Perl make it more so? By the way, I'm not opposed to these additions (I have my own uninformed biases against perl). I'd just like the core people to keep working on what their working on without being overly distracted by having to support the language-and-extension-tool-of-the-day. Ray Footnotes: [1] If any of you are in RTP, drop me a line. Let's have a beer!

1 participants
0 comments

Re: Perl embedding: trial balloon 25 years

Hrvoje Niksic

Geoffrey Furnish <furnish(a)actel.com> writes: > So you don't like Perl. Fine. Who cares what you languages you > like, anyway? Geoffrey, please look at your .Sig. What code have *you* contributed?

1 participants
0 comments

Re: Perl embedding: trial balloon 25 years

Hrvoje Niksic

jari.aalto(a)poboxes.com (Jari Aalto+mail.emacs) writes: > what I meant, that "vast number of active, existing, highly skilled > Perl module writers and Perl program writers, Perl porters" might > step into XEmacs business. Imagine the brainpower. Thanks, but: no thanks.

1 participants
0 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 April 1999