From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Broken lisp/Makefile.w32-in Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 07:11:37 +0200 (IST) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <20020831175417.49CD.LEKTU@terra.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1030857315 24971 127.0.0.1 (1 Sep 2002 05:15:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 05:15:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Takaaki.Ota@am.sony.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17lN4s-0006Ue-00 for ; Sun, 01 Sep 2002 07:15:14 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17lNcS-0003v6-00 for ; Sun, 01 Sep 2002 07:49:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17lN6L-0000s0-00; Sun, 01 Sep 2002 01:16:45 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17lN46-0000na-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Sep 2002 01:14:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17lN3y-0000n5-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Sep 2002 01:14:25 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17lN3y-0000mo-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Sep 2002 01:14:18 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA25126; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 07:11:37 +0200 (IST) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Juanma Barranquero In-Reply-To: <20020831175417.49CD.LEKTU@terra.es> Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:7236 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:7236 On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Juanma Barranquero wrote: > > Windows 98 SE is still a very popular version of Windows (I, > > for one, prefer it to both Windows/ME and W2K/XP). > > Curious. I find both NT 4.0 and W2K to be exceptionally stable (XP is > less so IMHO). I wasn't thinking about stability (although my Windows 98SE machine stays up for months on end without crashing). I was talking about usability and back-compatibility. Too many old programs don't work on W2K/XP, and too many little but valuable features are unavailable there but available in 98SE. > Well, yes, but supporting building on W2K/XP does not pose any problem > because CMD.EXE is quite more powerful than COMMAND.COM :) I think the real problem with that is not COMMAND.COM per se (after all, the MS-DOS build uses _only_ COMMAND.COM and doesn't have any trouble), but rather the need to support COMMAND.COM, CMD.EXE, and the Cygwin/MinGW environment at the same time and with the same Makefile's.