headers
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu | 1 Jan 2012 02:47
Picon

Re: Mac OS-compatible ports (was: C-g crash in C-x C-f (OSX Lion))


On 2011/12/31, at 22:22, Ted Zlatanov wrote:

> I agree with your statement, but we're not "pushing" the NS port only
> because it's for GNUstep.  It's quite usable on Mac OS X.  I said that
> "in its defense" it is compatible with GNUstep by using the Cocoa API,
> which your port isn't.  So, to make the current situation clear, the
> Mac OS port choice is between:
> 
> 1) NS port: Cocoa API, works on Mac OS X with some issues, compatible
> with GNUstep and can work there (it needs lots of work though).  Apple
> has repeatedly stated Cocoa is the preferred API for Mac OS X
> developers, especially for new software.
> 
> 2) your Carbon-based port: works on Mac OS X well, can't be compatible
> with GNUstep.  Apple has not been clear about Carbon's future, even
> though Carbon seems to be well entrenched at this point.

As I've been repeatedly saying, the Mac port uses Cocoa for its
GUI implementation.  If you call the Mac port Carbon-based, lots
of the applications including those bundled with Mac OS X such as
Safari.app should also be called Carbon-based.

(snip)

> Given those choices, the NS port seems like the best choice for
> inclusion in GNU Emacs, which is the status quo.  Are any of the facts
> I've presented inaccurate?

I'm not saying about the inclusion.  I'm just correcting negative
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu | 1 Jan 2012 02:54
Picon

Re: Mac OS-compatible ports


On 2011/12/31, at 23:27, Jan D. wrote:

>> 1) NS port: Cocoa API, works on Mac OS X with some issues, compatible
>> with GNUstep and can work there (it needs lots of work though).  Apple
>> has repeatedly stated Cocoa is the preferred API for Mac OS X
>> developers, especially for new software.
> 
> I don't think GNUStep needs "lots" of work, just work :-).  AFAIK, it is mainly fonts that are problematic,
but then again, fonts in GNUStep (i.e. without Emacs) seems to be a problem.  The NS font backend needs work,
as it is quite slow and uses old API:s.

What about the "Lisp evaluation inside read_socket_hook" problem
on the GNUstep port?  Is your idea for Cocoa (Mac OS X 10.5 or
later) applicable to GNUstep, or do you have another idea?

				     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
				mituharu <at> math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Christoph Scholtes | 1 Jan 2012 03:40

Re: emacs-20111206-r106632 Windows Binaries

Sorry, forgot to include Stefan and Chong in the thread. See below.

On 12/31/2011 4:14 PM, Christoph Scholtes wrote:

> On 12/31/2011 3:38 PM, Drew Adams wrote:
>> December 6 was the last published Windows binary. Can we look forward
>> to more?
>> It was really helpful when Sean was publishing them weekly. Thx.
>
> Yes. Sorry, I just started a new job and haven't been able to spend a
> lot of time on this.
>
> One thing I am still waiting for is a statement from Chong or Stefan as
> to whether I should build the weekly snapshot from a source tarball and
> upload it too to the ftp site.
>
> Chong, Stefan,
> Can you please comment on this? See
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2011-12/msg00274.html for
> reference.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Eli Zaretskii | 1 Jan 2012 04:56
Picon

Re: emacs-20111206-r106632 Windows Binaries

> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 15:19:12 -0800
> Cc: help-emacs-windows <at> gnu.org, 'Sean Sieger' <sean.sieger <at> gmail.com>,
> 	'Emacs-Devel devel' <emacs-devel <at> gnu.org>
> 
> > upload it too to the ftp site.
> 
> FWIW, I'm looking for an HTTP site for it (not FTP).

That FTP site is accessible via HTTP as well.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jason Rumney | 1 Jan 2012 04:58
Picon

Re: [h-e-w] emacs-20111206-r106632 Windows Binaries

"Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:

> Thanks for doing this, Christoph.
>
>> upload it too to the ftp site.
>
> FWIW, I'm looking for an HTTP site for it (not FTP).

The GNU ftp sites are available via http.  Just change the protocol.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Leo | 1 Jan 2012 07:26
Face
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Mac OS-compatible ports

On 2011-12-31 21:22 +0800, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
> I agree with your statement, but we're not "pushing" the NS port only
> because it's for GNUstep.  It's quite usable on Mac OS X.

I wonder how you reach that conclusion. If you don't use Emacs heavily
on a Mac, then you don't know if it is quite usable. My experience is
that it is not. John Wiegley were also disappointed by the ns-port some
months ago and he has been happy using the Mac-Port. My impression is
that Mac-Port is a piece of solid well-engineered software. It is a pity
not more Mac users can make use of it and have to resort to nonfree
software such as TextMate etc.

Cheers.
Leo
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu | 1 Jan 2012 08:02
Picon

Re: Mac OS-compatible ports (was: C-g crash in C-x C-f (OSX Lion))


On 2012/01/01, at 10:47, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu wrote:

> 
> On 2011/12/31, at 22:22, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
> 
>> I agree with your statement, but we're not "pushing" the NS port only
>> because it's for GNUstep.  It's quite usable on Mac OS X.  I said that
>> "in its defense" it is compatible with GNUstep by using the Cocoa API,
>> which your port isn't.  So, to make the current situation clear, the
>> Mac OS port choice is between:
>> 
>> 1) NS port: Cocoa API, works on Mac OS X with some issues, compatible
>> with GNUstep and can work there (it needs lots of work though).  Apple
>> has repeatedly stated Cocoa is the preferred API for Mac OS X
>> developers, especially for new software.
>> 
>> 2) your Carbon-based port: works on Mac OS X well, can't be compatible
>> with GNUstep.  Apple has not been clear about Carbon's future, even
>> though Carbon seems to be well entrenched at this point.
> 
> As I've been repeatedly saying, the Mac port uses Cocoa for its
> GUI implementation.  If you call the Mac port Carbon-based, lots
> of the applications including those bundled with Mac OS X such as
> Safari.app should also be called Carbon-based.

Also, I would like to note that some of recent improvements to
Mac OS X and iOS are provided outside Cocoa, especially if they
are not directly related to GUI.  They are not classified as
Carbon, but they are also C APIs and not provided by GNUstep.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Jan Djärv | 1 Jan 2012 11:36
Picon

Re: Mac OS-compatible ports

Hello.

1 jan 2012 kl. 07:26 skrev Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>:

> On 2011-12-31 21:22 +0800, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
>> I agree with your statement, but we're not "pushing" the NS port only
>> because it's for GNUstep.  It's quite usable on Mac OS X.
> 
> I wonder how you reach that conclusion. If you don't use Emacs heavily
> on a Mac, then you don't know if it is quite usable. My experience is
> that it is not. 

YMMV. I use Emacs every day on OSX and it is no different from using Emacs on X in my experience. But I don't use
Gnus or other packages that people seems to have problems with.

      Jan D.
Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
Jan Djärv | 1 Jan 2012 11:48
Picon

Re: Mac OS-compatible ports

Hello.

1 jan 2012 kl. 02:54 skrev YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <mituharu <at> math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp>:
> 
> What about the "Lisp evaluation inside read_socket_hook" problem
> on the GNUstep port?  Is your idea for Cocoa (Mac OS X 10.5 or
> later) applicable to GNUstep, or do you have another idea?

If GNUstep provides the same API, it is applicable, but I have to get GNUstep up and running first to check.
Their documentation says no, but that might not be up to date.

But I'm sure some solution can be found. It does not need to be the same as for OSX. 

On another note, could your font backend be plugged in in Emacs 24?  Would it be worthwhile?

   Jan D.
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Carsten Mattner | 1 Jan 2012 11:48

Re: Mac OS-compatible ports

On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Jan Djärv <jan.h.d <at> swipnet.se> wrote:
> Hello.
>
>
> 1 jan 2012 kl. 07:26 skrev Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>:
>
>> On 2011-12-31 21:22 +0800, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
>>> I agree with your statement, but we're not "pushing" the NS port only
>>> because it's for GNUstep.  It's quite usable on Mac OS X.
>>
>> I wonder how you reach that conclusion. If you don't use Emacs heavily
>> on a Mac, then you don't know if it is quite usable. My experience is
>> that it is not.
>
> YMMV. I use Emacs every day on OSX and it is no different from
> using Emacs on X in my experience. But I don't use Gnus or other
> packages that people seems to have problems with.

Same here, except I may not miss the intl font support the Mac port
is supposed to have as an advantage.

I do need features from bzr trunk, so there's no option for me to
try the Mac port.

There may be memory leaks, but there are enough potential leaks
common to emacs regardless of ports (also seen with X on Linux).
Emacs on Linux configured as
/configure --without-selinux --without-tiff \
    --without-sound --without-dbus --without-gconf \
    --without-gsettings --without-xft --without-gsettings \
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane