From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Perry E. Metzger" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Windows emacs-25.1 i686 vs x86_64? Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 14:02:28 -0500 Message-ID: <20161107140228.0a60be57@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> References: <6e2cffe5-942b-48d4-9ed5-ef39803bcd30@googlegroups.com> <87mvhgsf21.fsf@russet.org.uk> <8360o4monq.fsf@gnu.org> <87vaw4gq0j.fsf@russet.org.uk> <83oa1vlnkk.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1iba6od.fsf@russet.org.uk> <83ins2jq88.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg2p8swx.fsf@russet.org.uk> <831sypjmst.fsf@gnu.org> <83wpggip8j.fsf@gnu.org> <05ba947a-970a-178c-8036-bcdf84485384@cs.ucla.edu> <83zilbgo4u.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1478545465 16934 195.159.176.226 (7 Nov 2016 19:04:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 19:04:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Paul Eggert , emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, phillip.lord@russet.org.uk To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 07 20:04:15 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c3pCf-0007Gh-Ml for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2016 20:03:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56025 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c3pCi-00013y-Ng for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2016 14:03:36 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45217) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c3pBn-00012N-4T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2016 14:02:40 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c3pBi-0008QO-Sv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2016 14:02:39 -0500 Original-Received: from hacklheber.piermont.com ([166.84.7.14]:58572) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c3pBe-0008PL-6h; Mon, 07 Nov 2016 14:02:30 -0500 Original-Received: from snark.cb.piermont.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hacklheber.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2592A26D; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 14:02:28 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from jabberwock.cb.piermont.com (jabberwock.cb.piermont.com [10.160.2.107]) by snark.cb.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE0E2DE145; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 14:02:28 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83zilbgo4u.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 166.84.7.14 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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 Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:209256 Archived-At: On Mon, 07 Nov 2016 20:07:13 +0200 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > covering Windows 9x prominently in Emacs documentation wastes > > users' time and makes us look technically dated. > > A short paragraph in a README is not "prominent documentation". > Let's not lose the perspective when trying to make a point, okay? I'm somewhat surprised that we're discussing support for a proprietary OS that has been off vendor extended support for over a decade and which no one uses any more. I have to assume the main reason for that is that some people (including RMS) were under the mistaken impression that it is still widely used, which it is not. Data has already been provided to back that up. (If you buy a new computer in China it comes with Windows 10, though of course not necessarily a legal copy. No one would willingly buy a machine with Windows 98 installed. It doesn't even support modern hardware.) Perry -- Perry E. Metzger perry@piermont.com