Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 14:28:52 +0200 From: Michael Elbel <Michael.Elbel@consol.de> To: garyj@fkr.dec.com Cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org, asami@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/editors/xemacs-packages - Imported sources Message-ID: <19990624142848.E1980@consol.de>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In lists.freebsd.cvs.all you write: >Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami writes: >> But I think we still want at least a mule package. >> >If the user defines USE_MULE then xemacs-packages grabs the mule packages, >too. Maybe this should be the default if PACKAGE_BUILDING is defined ? 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. 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. That's just my opinion, of course. I'll leave the final decision to the ports master. Michael -- \|/ -O- Michael Elbel, ConSol* GmbH, - me@consol.de - 089 / 45841-256 /|\ Fermentation fault (coors dumped) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990624142848.E1980>