[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?)
From: |
Giovanni Biscuolo |
Subject: |
Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?) |
Date: |
Tue, 29 Sep 2020 10:49:53 +0200 |
Hello Mark,
thank you for your interest.
Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> writes:
[...]
>> IMHO it's useful to have emacs-lucid in official Guix, with subsitutes
>> available for end users (I'm not using emacs in daemon mode over X11
>> over SSH for fear of chrashes).
>
> FYI, our 'emacs-no-x-toolkit' package has a closure size of 390.9 MiB
> and does _not_ have the Gtk bug described above. That's why I use it.
Yes I know that emacs version, I'm also considering using it (I do not
remember why I decided I needed an X toolkit... I should just try).
> Are there additional benefits to 'emacs-lucid' that are not already
> addressed by 'emacs-no-x-toolkit'?
emacs-lucid would have an X toolkit that does not crash the daemon when
remotely connecting, some people like to have that (an X tookit I mean)
even if usually it's not strictly needed.
> I'm not necessarily opposed to adding another Emacs variant, but I
> don't yet understand the motivation.
Help some users avoid experiencing "the bug", but I understand that
probably the use base for emacs-lucid is tiny.
Thanks! Gio'
--
Giovanni Biscuolo
Xelera IT Infrastructures
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?), (continued)
- Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?), Bengt Richter, 2020/09/28
- Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?), zimoun, 2020/09/28
- Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?), zimoun, 2020/09/28
- Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?), Pierre Neidhardt, 2020/09/28
- Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?), Mark H Weaver, 2020/09/28
- Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?), Pierre Neidhardt, 2020/09/29
- Re: emacs-lucid (was Re: Emacs closure at ~900MB?),
Giovanni Biscuolo <=