Re: Removing MULTI_KBOARD

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

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

  > > Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:08:29 +0300
  > > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
  > > Cc: nickrob@snap.net.nz, dann@ics.uci.edu, cyd@stupidchicken.com,
  > > 	emacs-devel@gnu.org
  > > 
  > > > From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
  > > > 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.

Was the removed MULTI_KBOARD code actually needed?