From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Some findings and suggestion about Emacs on w32 Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 15:15:11 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <011801c4b902$bae353f0$0200a8c0@sedrcw11488> References: <008d01c4b886$32d07ff0$0200a8c0@sedrcw11488> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1098537540 16305 80.91.229.6 (23 Oct 2004 13:19:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:19:00 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 23 15:18:48 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CLLnE-0007Lv-00 for ; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 15:18:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CLLum-0003rj-CQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:26:36 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CLLue-0003rX-WE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:26:29 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CLLue-0003r8-6H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:26:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CLLue-0003r5-3h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:26:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [81.228.10.110] (helo=av7-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CLLm0-0005LP-Pv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:17:33 -0400 Original-Received: by av7-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 121E737F01; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 15:17:32 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av7-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0462F37E4F; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 15:17:32 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from sedrcw11488 (t3o58p83.telia.com [195.252.56.83]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 0FFB137E46; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 15:17:30 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: "Benjamin Riefenstahl" , "Emacs Devel" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:28779 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:28779 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Benjamin Riefenstahl" : "Lennart Borgman" writes: : > 3) Addpm.exe should perhaps only add emacs_dir to the registry? Are : > the other values really used? : : Isn't the opposite the case? When "emacs_dir" is not set it is : automatically replaced with a generated value. I had to remove it to : be able to switch between production and development versions easily. Gnuclientw.exe looks for emacs_dir in the registry. : The other pseudo-variables still make sense. Or are they replaced by : Windows-specific initializations in the Emacs code itself by now? The installation says that the registry values are not needed any more. It seems to be true, except for that gnuclientw.exe needs it. : I think we should keep in mind that sockets do tend to cause grief : with personal firewalls. Mailslots are not portable but they are in : effect more user-friendly and so reduce the need for support. Could you please explain a bit more? I believe this is a serous issue since many corporate portable pc:s will have personal firewalls. The ms docs for mailslots says that this could be used between pc:s. Why is not the firewalls involved there? It seems like it is not, but I am not sure why. Is it some kind of bypassing of the network of both client and server are on the some pc? Unfortunately the old mailslot version does not have the -e switch for executing lisp code which I mentioned in another message. - Lennart