Re: xemacs and xemacs-packages

[Hauke Fath <hf%spg.tu-darmstadt.de@localhost>]

At 0:18 Uhr +0900 12.12.2010, OBATA Akio wrote:
>1. xemacs is useful in these days?

For me, yes. YMMV, as always.

The pkgsrc versions are quite behind the curve, though. And the pkg
Makefiles are byzantine.

>2. xemacs-packags contains lot of modules for xemacs, and some of them are
>    also provided by pkgsrc.
>    1) for xemacs, which is preferred, if both xemacs-packages and site-lisp
>       are installed?
>    2) Do we need to maintain both for xemacs? for example, xemacs-packags
>contains
>       SKK, but inputmethod/skk also must support xemacs?

...depends. I don't know if those pkgsrc'ed *emacs packages have been
properly tested with XEmacs. I remember when I used to set a bulk build to
build all those packages for XEmacs, most of them wouldn't build. That was
(at least) two years ago, but I suspect things haven't changed for the
better.

        hauke

-- 
     The ASCII Ribbon Campaign                    Hauke Fath
()     No HTML/RTF in email            Institut für Nachrichtentechnik
/\     No Word docs in email                     TU Darmstadt
     Respect for open standards              Ruf +49-6151-16-3281