From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: National Language Support Functions Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 20:50:40 +0100 Message-ID: <45957190.9030801@student.lu.se> References: <458AB581.7090303@student.lu.se> <458AF7AC.5030500@student.lu.se> <458B2295.7010806@student.lu.se> <4593C0B1.8060406@gmail.com> <4594EE89.6090403@gnu.org> <459536C5.4090503@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dough.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1167421896 28606 80.91.229.10 (29 Dec 2006 19:51:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:51:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-pretest-bug-bounces+gebp-emacs-pretest-bug=gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 29 20:51:34 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gebp-emacs-pretest-bug@gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H0NlM-0003BU-Cj for gebp-emacs-pretest-bug@gmane.org; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 20:51:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H0NlL-00015v-Rt for gebp-emacs-pretest-bug@gmane.org; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:51:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H0Nl7-00011V-Md for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:51:17 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H0Nl5-0000xx-LG for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:51:17 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H0Nl5-0000xm-GP; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:51:15 -0500 Original-Received: from [80.76.149.213] (helo=ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1H0Nl4-0002cp-OR; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:51:15 -0500 Original-Received: from c83-254-145-24.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.145.24]:60889 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H0Nl1-0006NK-9U; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 20:51:12 +0100 User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) Original-To: Juanma Barranquero In-Reply-To: X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0665-0, 2006-12-29), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1H0Nl1-0006NK-9U. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1H0Nl1-0006NK-9U 38edc6d86a33e817c192618cfdd7ff46 X-BeenThere: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for CVS Emacs." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-pretest-bug-bounces+gebp-emacs-pretest-bug=gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-pretest-bug-bounces+gebp-emacs-pretest-bug=gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:16264 gmane.emacs.devel:64437 Archived-At: Juanma Barranquero wrote: > On 12/29/06, Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote: > >> It would be very good if we continued this discussion. > > And if no agreement can be reached, will you add another patch to your > binary Emacs distribution and make it still more divergent, or will > you accept that perhaps it is better to leave it as it stands now? I have already said I agreed. Somehow I misunderstood the problem thinking that keyboard layout was involved. It is not and I really do not understand why I thought that. Sorry for the trouble, but at least I know now how Emacs works in this area and why the choice was made. It would probably be good if it was explained in the manual. I have no intention of making my Emacs binary distribution be different from Emacs default if I can avoid it. On the other hand there are still bugs I know about that affects the w32 side mostly. I will tell as soon as I get time. I have made no patches for those bugs and would be glad if we fixed them instead. The purpose of my binary distribution was (as I several times has said) to make it more easy to get Emacs up and running on w32. I was surprised that it was so difficult and time consuming. I know it is not a very high priority to make this easier, mostly because of lack of resources.