From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Removing MULTI_KBOARD Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:05:55 +0300 Message-ID: References: <200807310343.m6V3h1Zo006813@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <200807311921.m6VJLxu1016770@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <200808011209.m71C9Tj3018356@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <200808020655.m726tvsI017108@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <200808020927.m729Rnov027876@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <489432B0.2000305@gnu.org> <87r697qzn3.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <18580.58502.366085.330994@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <200808040115.m741Fp6T000371@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1219514804 5577 80.91.229.12 (23 Aug 2008 18:06:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:06:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 23 20:07:37 2008 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 4.50) id 1KWxWT-0001Ar-IT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 20:07:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57411 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KWxVV-0002hz-UL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:06:37 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KWxUw-0002Ry-VH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:06:03 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KWxUv-0002QH-Cn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:06:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37593 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KWxUv-0002QD-9o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:06:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout3.012.net.il ([84.95.2.7]:48838) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KWxUu-0003r9-Er for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:06:01 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.211.50]) by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0K6200AE6FMP2CG1@i_mtaout3.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:06:26 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 9.1 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:102880 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:08:29 +0300 > From: Eli Zaretskii > Cc: nickrob@snap.net.nz, dann@ics.uci.edu, cyd@stupidchicken.com, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > From: Stefan Monnier > > Cc: dann@ics.uci.edu, nickrob@snap.net.nz, cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:37:22 -0400 > > > > >> Eli, could you explain what is the remaining problem with his > > >> change, then? > > > > > I will be able to explain that when I actually make the DOS port > > > working again. Everyone else is telling me that there are no > > > problems, but no one of them is actually familiar with how the DOS > > > port works, so I still have my doubts. > > > > OK. So I hereby grant you a voucher for 32KB of complaints about the > > MULTI_KBOARD merge, to be redeemed when the DOS port is revived, > > Beware: I will hold you to your word. Well, it turned out to be much worse than my worst fears, but I did it anyway: the MS-DOS build of Emacs 23 is operational again. There are still a few problems I need to take care of, but it compiles, links, dumps itself, and comes up as a useful editor. Please don't ask for more details, or I will have hard time resisting the temptation to stop being civilized and say everything I think about the code changes that broke the DOS port so hard for such relatively small changes in functionality. And I don't mean just the MULTI_KBOARD thing. P.S. That's just 548 bytes out of the 32KB I'm entitled to. I reserve the rest for a rainy day.