[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:0.144 / U:0.272 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site