Re: Removing MULTI_KBOARD

[Dan Nicolaescu <dann@ics.uci.edu>]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:

  > > If the logical thing to do is remove MULTI_KBOARD, and therefore the MSDOS
  > > port, I'm sure that after discussion Eli would see that.
  > 
  > FWIW, removing MULTI_KBOARD does not entail removing MSDOS support: it
  > just requires a bit more effort to update the MSDOS code.  The problem
  > is that Dan should have made this effort (even if he can't test it
  > because the MSDOS port currently doesn't build/work), unless someone
  > else (i.e. Eli) had agreed to do it, or unless we had decided to drop
  > the MSDOS port (which I'd favor, but not enough to impose it on Eli).
  > 
  > So Dan, rather than revert your removal of MULTI_KBOARD, could you do
  > a best-effort update of the MSDOS code to adapt it to the new "always
  > multi kbd" code?

What makes you think I didn't?  To the best of my knowledge no extra
changes are required for the "always multi kbd" code.  No evidence of
the contrary has been given this far.