DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 55TGiIQf2393108 Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com Authentication-Results: delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 55TGiIQf2393108 Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=QhBqN02g X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E310D3852FE7 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com; s=default; t=1751215456; bh=B65Pl5yEDLB+HO3wCq7tAfDGxuqIIt5oKsQz1Ustnog=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=QhBqN02g2m3pvzuhuNCMErncFGzCX5LAMaPVu0yLidPuG2Z3s3fOsy8jmhNTzMxby ipo85w2Ut2ZdbMHZiiCqoVvR4MuHoCDF0mFm7h4focsdbQvz7VAMEWHeB9Kt7WV/E7 8auAgrEiUak+H8RDf5pypmhyPNNZXdJqsep5i6Bo= X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 88DE1385E02A ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 88DE1385E02A ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1751215434; cv=none; b=fzM5d4qeByognuz2A85rAFbNs5Cxzty4UNTkeZgLOntBRwFENwvzDrrJEJB+er/gJsIzQDBX0klB4XF1GR1AOsP2V75fRRwpCzcZQtHVi3y13QNK9kQB1DexbHPtkR+IIJ97lpBjrG5F89iTp5BJhNhGI/L935GWOtuPkzvatI0= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1751215434; c=relaxed/simple; bh=shFirRMqLX5Z231jzBsxcrxs0n2RB4TLPznclF66YpY=; h=DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From; b=cZzwhbd+sgObPL9eYDoPgE02xKQjF7cuMZeWeycAouALUyRYwVrJaElPxeVbDyndwMRqUDj3UcPaV9bXV9f/Tlvxt/Rf/REt8UQuWLOGKtMomnz2zRL9YbNzyvD1lQKfB7Lsiealm4J0M1Z4dh7nJJkFkG1j/hsy7nrwB2SFfYU= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 88DE1385E02A X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1751215433-24039d0818c7fb20001-w5GHUG X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: moss AT cs DOT umass DOT edu X-Barracuda-RBL-Trusted-Forwarder: 128.119.240.136 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailsrv.cs.umass.edu 5C17C5BDD5 X-Barracuda-RBL-Trusted-Forwarder: 172.26.64.86 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2025 12:43:53 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.1 Subject: Re: XEmacs as a Cygwin64 package. Content-Language: en-US X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: XEmacs as a Cygwin64 package. To: Aidan Kehoe , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Cc: Dan Harkless References: <6861 DOT 633f DOT 55bc7 DOT 1add AT parhasard DOT net> In-Reply-To: <6861.633f.55bc7.1add@parhasard.net> X-Barracuda-Connect: mailsrv.cs.umass.edu[128.119.240.136] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1751215433 X-Barracuda-Encrypted: TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 X-Barracuda-URL: https://barramail.cs.umass.edu:443/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1 X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at cs.umass.edu X-Barracuda-Scan-Msg-Size: 1047 X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=9.7 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.3.143572 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eliot Moss via Cygwin Reply-To: Eliot Moss Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "Cygwin" On 6/29/2025 12:01 PM, Aidan Kehoe via Cygwin wrote: > > Dear Cygwin, > > I am the maintainer of XEmacs; I have recently made a beta release and that > beta release has no complication or exection problems that are specifically > related to 64-bit Cygwin. > > Dan Harkless advises me that there is no current 64-bit Cygwin XEmacs package > and that a 32-bit Cygwin XEmacs package remains available. Is there someone > who might be interested in maintaining a 64-bit Cygwin XEmacs? If not, I am > happy to take that on. Dear Aidan - Would you *prefer* to do it yourself, or be at least as happy if someone else takes it on? Is there a current maintainer for 32-bit XEmacs? That person might be logical to support 64-bit as well. On a somewhat different tack: Is XEmacs now being more actively developed? Web commentary from four years ago suggested that its development pretty much stopped ... [Note: Certainly not intending to step into the middle of any contention about Emacs vs XEmacs!] Regards - Eliot Moss -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple