From owner-freebsd-ports Thu Jun 24 19:10:13 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF8F814E25; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:10:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami@cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id VAA00100; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 21:06:14 -0500 (CDT) Received: from sji-ca4-28.ix.netcom.com(205.186.212.156) by dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma000057; Thu Jun 24 21:05:44 1999 Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.6.9) id TAA83100; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:05:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:05:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199906250205.TAA83100@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: silvia.hip.berkeley.edu: asami set sender to asami@cs.berkeley.edu using -f To: me@freebsd.org Cc: garyj@fkr.dec.com, ports@freebsd.org, ports-jp@jp.freebsd.org In-reply-to: <19990624135208.C1980@consol.de> (message from Michael Elbel on Thu, 24 Jun 1999 13:52:10 +0200) Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/editors/xemacs-packages - Imported sources From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) References: <19990624135208.C1980@consol.de> Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * From: Michael Elbel * Hmm, we'd need to have a mule enabled xemacs21 package as well then. You * can't use the mule packages without compiling xemacs mule enabled. Oh. * After the creation of separate xemacs-mule ports by Kazuyuki IENAGA I've * been wondering if I shouldn't drop mule support in the port * altogether. I've kept it so far because it really isn't a lot of work to * support it. I'd really like to know if *anybody* is using the stock xemacs * port with mule. * * All in all, I'd say it isn't worth the hassle to have *two* mule-enabled * pre-built packages. You are quite right. Actually I was wondering if you two can work to merge the two ports together. Is it hard to make it so that xemacs21/Makefile is capable of building both un-mule and fully mule-enabled versions (defaulting to the former) and xemacs21-mule/Makefile will just include it with USE_MULE defined? * That's just my opinion, of course. I'll leave the final decision to the * ports master. * * Michael Please don't invoke me to make decisions on ports I don't even use (sorry Ienaga-san, but emacs20 is quite good enough for me ;). -PW To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message