[lkml]   [2001]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Microsoft and Xenix.
    Rob Landley <> writes:
    > That would be the X version of emacs. And there's the explanation
    > for the split between GNU and X emacs: it got forked and the
    > closed-source version had a vew years of divergent development
    > before opening back up, by which point it was very different to
    > reconcile the two code bases.

    No, sorry, wrong, for at least a couple of reasons reasons:

    1) XEmacs, being constrained to be under the same license (GPL) as
    its progenitor, GNU Emacs, could never have been closed-source.

    2) Lucid Emacs, the version of Emacs that becamse XEmacs, was not
    started until ca. 1992

    I refer you to for
    documentation---JWZ was Mr. Lucid Emacs for quite a time.

    In 1987, there are any number of things that it could have been---I'd
    guess either Unipress Emacs or perhaps Gosling Emacs.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:55    [W:0.039 / U:45.816 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site