Arne Babenhauserheide, le Thu 24 Mar 2011 20:30:07 +0100, a écrit :
> Same as with nsmux:
Same answer :)
Samuel
Arne Babenhauserheide, le Thu 24 Mar 2011 20:01:16 +0100, a écrit :
>* Makefile.am: added missing linker additions for libmachuser and
> libhurduse
These are not supposed to be missing, they'll be explicited in
/usr/lib/libc.so in libc0.3=2.11.2-14. You can do it by hand: simply
append
IN
Same as with nsmux:
commit 8b44ac43392314ead5c686ac74484b6190b3dfce
Author: Arne Babenhauserheide (on hurd)
Date: Thu Mar 24 19:27
Hi,
nsmux from incubator did not build for me. This change makes it build (I hope
the commit message is halfways acceptable - if not, feel free to change it):
commit 05754cdb5456a6dbc04b864780ee40fe065c4796
Author: Arne Babenhauserheide (on hurd)
Date: Thu Mar 24 18:53:17 2011 +
On Thursday 24 March 2011 13:16:52 Svante Signell wrote:
> Looks like the *.elc files are in emacs23-common while the *.el files
> are in emacs23-el (uncompiled and compressed). Do you still want them?
Only if it’s not too much effort.
> > … *el is still important: For the integrated help.
>
> Wh
On Tuesday 25 January 2011 06:34:33 olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> > Does a priority wish list exist for the development,
>
> Nope. Every developer has different priorities...
>
> Having said that, some kind of generic roadmap still would be useful --
> but so far nobody got around to compile o
On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 12:31 +0100, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Hi Svante,
>
> On the long term I will likely need the lisp files, because I want to setup
> emacs in Hurd to mirror my local setup → make it a real work environment for
> me.
>
> Or are the *.el files just the uncompiled lisp f
Hi Svante,
On the long term I will likely need the lisp files, because I want to setup
emacs in Hurd to mirror my local setup → make it a real work environment for
me.
Or are the *.el files just the uncompiled lisp files with the *.elc files
already
included?
… *el is still important: For t
Ludovic Courtès, le Wed 23 Mar 2011 19:24:18 +0100, a écrit :
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> > This is the potentially controversial patch. :-)
> >
> > It removes serverboot, which is no longer built since commit
> > dfa4d617a012dd46d3849e0d2538a4b7890c1306 (Sept. 2004), and moves the
