Re: C-g crash in C-x C-f (OSX Lion)

[YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu]

>>>>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 11:42:57 +0100, Carsten Mattner <address@hidden> said:

> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:38 AM, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:33:03 +0100, Carsten Mattner
>>>>>>> <address@hidden> said:
>> 
>>> All of this prompted me to try harder to make the terminal emacs
>>> session as usable (key bindings and other non flashy things) as
>>> the graphical one.  I don't really use graphical features anyway
>>> and have to --disable-FOO on Xorg.  Hey, nyan-mode works in
>>> text-mode too :).
>> 
>> I'd recommend that for your important tasks.  But it would be
>> appreciated if you could try the NS port for the tasks where crash
>> is not so critical and send bug reports.

> Sure. I'm surprised you endorse the NS port instead of the Mac or
> Aqua ports :-).

I didn't make the subject of the sentence explicit.  At least bug
reports for the NS port will be appreciated by someone.  I
occasionally test whether the reported bugs can also be reproduced
with the Mac port.

>> BTW, Terminal.app bundled with Lion is also linked with the Carbon
>> framework, so if you really want to avoid Carbon as much as
>> possible, then it would be better to use another terminal emulator.

> I use iTerm2.app and xterm.

FWIW, both iTerm2 and X11.app are linked with the Carbon framework, in
case it still really matters for you.

> The comparison doesn't hold as the OSX gui frontend of GNU Emacs is
> not as well maintained and tested as the X frontend.  Therefore it
> makes a difference which future path is selected and limited
> resources are used for. If Carbon is deprecated and we already have
> a Cocoa frontend, enhancing that seems like a better plan to me.

Did you read through the thread?  The Mac port uses Cocoa AppKit for
GUI.

> Would you consider porting over missing bits into the --with-ns
> frontend?

No.

                                     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
                                address@hidden