Re: debian-0.90: a few comments
Daniel Quinlan writes:
>
>
> Sunando Sen <sens@acf2.NYU.EDU> writes:
>
> > [...] I just don't want to download and reinstall everything when
> > only a few things have changed.
>
> It is not possible to upgrade from 0.90 to 0.91. I think Ian Murdock
> made this clear as soon as the decision to change from absolute to
> relative paths in the *.deb (gzipped cpio) files was made.
>
> Summary: reinstall everything. :(
>
> Advice: wait for 0.92. :)
Fine. I can wait, and I have more or less solved the little problems
anyway.
> > 3. The copy of vi (or rather elvis) is buggy. It corrupts the
> > screen once I suspended it, and I couldn't return to it with `fg' at
> > all. This is only a guess, but I suspect this comes from the buggy
> > copy of elvis-1.17 in sunsite.unc.edu. The patches used by the
> > author looked wrong to me, and anyway it had the same symptom as
> > debian's elvis. I do have a fixed copy of elvis.
>
> A fix for this would be great. This bug is really annoying.
I can send you an elvis binary on separate mail if you want.
> > 5. I was surprised to find twm missing, but that is only a minor
> > matter.
>
> I would personally like to see tvtwm provided, but I've managed quite
> well with fvwm so far. Maybe I can provide tvtwm once time allows.
>
> I suggest that you consider putting a twm package together for Debian.
> There is no reason why you couldn't, is there?
I don't know if I want to do this. As I don't think I am qualified
enough for this kind of work. Why not just take twm from the standard
Xfree distribution?
> > 6. The emacs could also do with a little better packaging. I suggest
> > including Robert Sander's console.el, which is setup for the Linux
> > console terminal. I have a copy of console.el and a defaults.el with
> > user-friendly keybindings. The default us.map that comes with the
> > kernel is not complete enough for emacs. For example, typical emacs
> > keystrokes like `Ctrl-@' or `Alt-%' are not defined (in general, no
> > Ctrl-Shift or Alt-Shift combinations are defined). I also have a copy
> > us.map of that takes care of these that I would like to contribute.
>
> Could you please mail any Emacs stuff to me so I can get it into the
> next Emacs release along with the other changes I've made?
Sending you on a separate mail.
> If you could clarify what you mean by "a little better packaging", I
> would appreciate it as well. I selfishly want to make Debian's Emacs
> implementation as good as possible since I seem to spend 90% of my
> time in it.
Well, all I meant is that emacs should work out of the box with all
the keys and so on. Actually, I would only include a very minimal
default.el, with not too many clever hacks, i.e., as standard an
installation as possible. BTW, is it really necessary to use
jka-compress.el, since emacs now includes crypt++.el? This is what I
meant by a `standard installation'. I think the emacs distribution
should be set up comfortably for a beginner and then as the `customer'
gets thoroughly addicted to emacs, she will gradually learn how to
make additional customisations herself.
> > 8. Is anybody working on making a TeX distribution? I have built the
> > latest web2c 6.0 stuff without any problem. I also could contribute
> > some slightly enhanced lpd filters and printcaps for laserjets.
>
> Supposedly, someone is. I think we have to get a vanilla TeX into the
> distribution NOW and worry about enhancements later. It has already
> taken far too long.
>
> I wonder if Ian Murdock would be willing to include the first
> completely working TeX package that showed up at his door.
I have TeX up and running. But, I would really like to see optional
packages like TeX and emacs use some sort of /usr/opt scheme. Hence I
am reluctant to send my own copy, which installs on /usr/lib/texmf
(that is the new web2c-6.0 layout) and /usr/bin.
--
Sunando Sen
Dept. of Economics Email: sens@acf2.nyu.edu
New York University
Reply to: