DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 55TIfuXj2435415 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 55TIfuXj2435415 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=W+6uIIDi X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B625D38515C3 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com; s=default; t=1751222514; bh=soDCXtm9zRa337PHi/u6VZeMGAqJWWSvk259jK00OZQ=; h=Date:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:References: List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help: List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:From; b=W+6uIIDislLHRX3e5IkRFuQMcJeJ23bKomicgcqshKc5XjugQ+DXr4OxcYThhzJEA 294MFUlFriORPbxbnRfP7fU4CEBxztNM0dJZVe5FSqoI53A7GVOz6VK9LufqbhEQsH jv/oOnlRdK7RfA/amPBTVLLEzNeuCKExgd24H32E= X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org EF7B43851A8E ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1751222459; cv=none; b=syCNC2sqLI2F6MhAj5J3w9+OwMOBEmdBYY0yQuN80NooHo90gMY++Y808LPz2KC2udOwQtdYooSWi0V5lvcDWmsgNoXFGuZxao5CSJXhvV+/WmH6AoX5/8h1NKAV2UddhAQq8YVj2o5Cb/eR9dQ18Oqvu5FUgzHsnVPLG4GfsVs= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1751222459; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2aO46THXXppLw0UCcSM7UbfH4kzAR3QFCyCaZqVpFwg=; h=DKIM-Signature:From:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:To:Subject; b=KGDwUf5yaWqmoSlsWazTWZFVdB03y5ynWR4GbD96zgWheB92JS1+8ygh8MAS8ADuoWqdwvrdRYtHMPGyDBF2U3o2znGyklohK14Er9XaddItJFz32GnS6k0szkjr97zQDugToLnhKEDC5Q32qnzPBpt/TnupUIXjgerSIcaCX+4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org EF7B43851A8E MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <6861.88b8.c4cf5.0386@parhasard.net> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2025 19:40:56 +0100 To: moss AT cs DOT umass DOT edu (Eliot Moss) CC: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: XEmacs as a Cygwin64 package. In-Reply-To: <09b99003-4889-15d9-5d3d-b3a1b1735250@cs.umass.edu> References: <116b635e-6604-602a-5f33-3efcdaecc91c AT cs DOT umass DOT edu> <18c271ac-8b4e-4b10-9ce2-5bbeff0676e6 AT SystematicSW DOT ab DOT ca> <09b99003-4889-15d9-5d3d-b3a1b1735250 AT cs DOT umass DOT edu> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 21.5 (beta36) "leeks" b4f645e1acc6 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) In-Reply-To: References: <6861 DOT 633f DOT 55bc7 DOT 1add AT parhasard DOT net> X-NS5-file-as-sent: t X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Aidan Kehoe via Cygwin Reply-To: Aidan Kehoe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Errors-To: cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com Sender: "Cygwin" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id 55TIfuXj2435415 Ar an naoú lá is fiche de mí Meitheamh, scríobh Eliot Moss: > On 6/29/2025 12:01 PM, Aidan Kehoe via Cygwin wrote: > > > 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? The project is not flush with resources and I’m always going to be more effective per hour spent at the core XEmacs work that is mainly C and Lisp. If someone else were to take it on that would be very welcome, but if not, I value having Cygwin users use the program and would be capable of the packaging work. > Is there a current maintainer for 32-bit XEmacs? That person might be > logical to support 64-bit as well. I believe the package is unmaintained. > On a somewhat different tack: Is XEmacs now being more actively developed? Yes; I finished a fairly intense decade of medical training and specialty exams, my life is a bit more stable and I have had far time to put in to XEmacs development since 2021. Two beta releases since then, plenty of work. Mats Lidell is also consistently working on it (chiefly as the Gentoo packager, bits and pieces at the core code), I’ve had help from Jaakko Salomaa, Richard Hopkins, and more recently Alan Mackenzie. https://foss.heptapod.net/xemacs/xemacs/-/commits/branch/default?ref_type=heads > 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!] I’m glad for GNU Emacs, as a project it’s doing a lot better than it used to back its old leadership was more central to the decision making. Best, Aidan -- ‘As I sat looking up at the Guinness ad, I could never figure out / How your man stayed up on the surfboard after fourteen pints of stout’ (C. Moore) -- 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