Xref: news2.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:606 From: marc AT mpi DOT nl (Marc Fleischeuers) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: emx1930*.zip Date: 25 Jan 1996 09:48:36 +0100 Organization: Max-Planck Institut für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen, the Netherlands Lines: 41 Sender: marc AT iwtspc09 DOT mpi DOT nl Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: iwtspc09.mpi.nl In-reply-to: piet@stego.cs.ruu.nl's message of 23 Jan 1996 16:58:39 +0100 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp In article piet AT stego DOT cs DOT ruu DOT nl (Piet van Oostrum) writes: | >>>>> Manfred Deutsch (MD) writes: | | Eli> There is no other site. The version of 19.30 on DJ's server includes | Eli> many bugfixes to the original GNU 19.30 release, so even if you get the | Eli> GNU distribution and recompile, you won't have some of the DOS-specific | Eli> fixes that the above binary has installed. | >> | >> There is a version on (some) simtel mirrors -- incomplete at Imperial | >> College, for instance -- in the msdos/editors directory. This is its | >> announcement file. Is this the same thing (it is somewhat patched) or | >> is it inferior? The definitive answer probably ought to replace the | >> one currently in the Emacs FAQ. Thanks for the efforts anyhow. | >> | MD> [some lines deleted] | >> | MD> I checked the file sizes of the files em1930??.zip on delorie.com and | MD> on ftp.uni-koeln.de, directory: /pc/msdos/gnuprogs. These are | MD> exactly the same. So I would guess the contained files should be the same, | MD> too. | | On the other hand, the simtel files have different file sizes. | Does this mean that they only have been differently packed, or is it a | different compilation? There are some more patches applied to the Simtel-em1930 (mainly dos-filename handling improvements), and they are repacked. It took Simtel archivers three weeks longer to respond than DJ, it seemed a waste not to include Eli's additional patches. The repacking was mainly to conform more closely to DJ's way of creating a binary distribution (thus hopefully also to FSF requirements). Bottom line is: you'd get by with either package, just don't mix them up. | -- | Piet van Oostrum | http://www.cs.ruu.nl/~piet -- Gone with the wind like a banana