From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:55:02 -0400 Message-ID: <87bpe85la1.fsf@stupidchicken.com> References: <83634jglab.fsf@gnu.org> <831vf7ge57.fsf@gnu.org> <83y6hfeyzw.fsf@gnu.org> <83vdcig87f.fsf@gnu.org> <87k4sywpvv.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <83tys2fbxs.fsf@gnu.org> <87hbo1iubm.fsf@home.jasonrumney.net> <83ljddg0w9.fsf@gnu.org> <4BAE867D.3030404@gmail.com> <4BAE9ED4.6070900@t-online.de> <87tys12sdy.fsf@telefonica.net> <83hbo0gb5j.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269802528 18806 80.91.229.12 (28 Mar 2010 18:55:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 18:55:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 28 20:55:20 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nvxdj-0000ld-RO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 20:55:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47610 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nvxdi-00033l-Pz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:55:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Nvxdc-00033S-Hy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:55:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35414 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nvxdb-000339-6h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:55:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvxdZ-00086V-FM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:55:07 -0400 Original-Received: from pantheon-po25.its.yale.edu ([130.132.50.119]:51948) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvxdZ-00086E-DU; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:55:05 -0400 Original-Received: from furry (173-14-147-246-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.14.147.246]) (authenticated bits=0) by pantheon-po25.its.yale.edu (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id o2SIt2eG018490 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:55:03 -0400 Original-Received: by furry (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BEBC3C05D; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:55:02 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83hbo0gb5j.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sun, 28 Mar 2010 10:26:00 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.94 (gnu/linux) X-YaleITSMailFilter: Version 1.2c (attachment(s) not renamed) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4-2.6 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: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:122805 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> > Hardware. Windows 9X is the main choice for old machines (like 64MB >> > ram). Don't take that away without need. >> >> If they run a 15 year old trashy OS, do they really demand the latest >> and greatest Emacs? (which is a very fat application for such machines) > > We still support DOS, which is even trashier, remember? > > I really don't understand this urge to be unkind to users of lesser > machines. If there was some effort required from the active > developers, I could at least begin to understand. But there isn't > any. I understand the virtues of maintaining support for older systems, but the prospect of maintaining support for non-networked Windows 95, when there's no one to use or test or develop that support, does not fill me with enthusiasm. We have one developer---you---who can still make sure Emacs works on DOS. (And also DOS can be emulated these days.) I'm not aware of anyone who is still using and/or reporting bugs (let alone developing) on a non-networked Windows 95 system. Are you?