Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:54:05 +1030 From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Emacs vs XEmacs: which to choose for plain console using? Message-ID: <20070104002404.GA78631@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <86lkkj6dhs.fsf@santinel.home.ua> References: <20070103194157.GA34860@host.my.domain> <86lkkj6dhs.fsf@santinel.home.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--cUQyP71RyCFJ5E3t Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday, 3 January 2007 at 22:50:55 +0200, Andrey Slusar wrote: > Wed, 3 Jan 2007 21:41:57 +0200, a@zeos.net wrote: > >> What are advantages and disadvantages of xemacs over emacs? >> Which to choose for plain console using? > > Emacs "by default" is very usable in plain FreeBSD ?onsole, also > XEmacs is not. I haven't seen this. I use Emacs, and I'd prefer to continue to do so, but some systems I work on only provide Xemacs. I haven't really seen any difference in non-windowed mode. Greg -- When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients. If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients. For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html See complete headers for address and phone numbers. --cUQyP71RyCFJ5E3t Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFnEkkIubykFB6QiMRAkz4AJ93sAP4VaomVU4SvKZv8DCf3xiYEQCgpZwk +IYoOgQwrSon5Tiv3q49KKk= =jZHn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --cUQyP71RyCFJ5E3t--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070104002404.GA78631>