Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:20:59 -0700 (PDT) From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: nate@mt.sri.com Cc: darrylo@hpnmhjw.sr.hp.com, questions@freefall.freebsd.org, me@freebsd.org Subject: Re: questions-digest V1 #1174 Message-ID: <199607312320.QAA21952@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199607312216.QAA04264@rocky.mt.sri.com> (message from Nate Williams on Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:16:56 -0600 (MDT))
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Yes, we want it. I'd rather have XEmacs than not, and requiring a * $100+ package to use it when it's not necessary seems a shame. No, the other alternative is to use the non-Motif toolkit for xemacs, at least for building packages. Under no circumstances will we want to ship a package with Motif dynamically linked. * When you add in the lisp files, adding a couple hundred K more isn't * going to make *THAT* big of a difference. I surely would prefer a smaller binary, provided the functionality is abouth the same. :) Michael, do you know how the Motif and non-Motif versions are different? Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607312320.QAA21952>