Emacs-2[01] on VMS
Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>
Has anybody worked on the VMS port of Emacs to get a more recent version
than 19.28 working ?
Would anybody be interested in porting Emacs-21 to VMS ?
Stefan
Jesper Naur
wrote in message news:5lr8raf...@rum.cs.yale.edu...
> Has anybody worked on the VMS port of Emacs to get a more recent version
> than 19.28 working ?
> Would anybody be interested in porting Emacs-21 to VMS ?
There was some attempt getting something started, see
http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/vmsperl/2000-02/msg00293.html
and related responses. How far it got - have a look
Best regards
Jesper Naur
Charles Sebold
I think I had heard that Brian Schenkenberger was working on porting
Emacs 20 a little while ago, but running into problems. You can find
him in comp.os.vms most days. I don't know how far he got, but I
certainly never heard an announcement of success.
I can't even begin to tell you how wonderful it would be to have a
recent Emacs on VMS. (If I knew C, I would volunteer.)
--
Charles Sebold 22nd of Cheshvan, 5762
Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-
>On 21 Cheshvan 5762, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>
>> Has anybody worked on the VMS port of Emacs to get a more recent
>> version than 19.28 working ? Would anybody be interested in porting
>> Emacs-21 to VMS ?
>
>I think I had heard that Brian Schenkenberger was working on porting
>Emacs 20 a little while ago, but running into problems. You can find
>him in comp.os.vms most days. I don't know how far he got, but I
>certainly never heard an announcement of success.
If it wasn't completely psycho-written shit code, you'd see a working
copy by now.
>I can't even begin to tell you how wonderful it would be to have a
>recent Emacs on VMS. (If I knew C, I would volunteer.)
It's not C that's the problem per se. Can you say autoconfig? Built
on C preprocessor dependancies that are little more than really ugly
unix hackery. Everytime I rekindle my effort on this project, little
time is lost before my blood boils. Targets are built in the same
locations as the sources and, if a build fails, it can never be pro-
perly restarted (and this is 19.28). Also, It might have been nice
if the Stallman crowd had merged the VMS mods of 19.28 into the later
versions but, since VMS is not a unix, it might have tainted their
precious unixy shit code.
*** MicroVAX-IV (the final MicroVAX) has achieved a 2-year uptime today! ***
--
VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001 VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
"And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery
intellect. Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbes
Phillip Helbig
> on C preprocessor dependancies that are little more than really ugly
> unix hackery. Everytime I rekindle my effort on this project, little
> time is lost before my blood boils. Targets are built in the same
> locations as the sources and, if a build fails, it can never be pro-
> perly restarted (and this is 19.28). Also, It might have been nice
> if the Stallman crowd had merged the VMS mods of 19.28 into the later
> versions but, since VMS is not a unix, it might have tainted their
> precious unixy shit code.
No surprise here. Stallman's ideas that ANY software which is not free
is INHERENTLY EVIL makes it unattractive for him or his followers to
support VMS in any form.
Alan Greig
<HEL...@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> wrote:
>No surprise here. Stallman's ideas that ANY software which is not free
>is INHERENTLY EVIL makes it unattractive for him or his followers to
>support VMS in any form.
That's not quite correct unless Stallman has altered his views since I
used to communicate with him back in the TOPS-20 EMACS days. It is an
interpretation of his views given by many of his followers. Stallman
explicitly asked for VMS people to help him keep the GNU stuff current
on VMS back in the early days.
Stallman did not call commercial copyrighted software evil but he did
argue that it was not , by any means, the best way to do things. RMS
doesn't believe passwords should exist in an ideal world either but
that doesn't mean all his accounts are unprotected. Although he did
leave passwords blank or RMS for years inviting people to look around
his accounts until the inevitable happened...
--
Alan
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr
proprietary Unixes, and Windows, at least, and a number also run on MacOS
and VMS. While some individual maintainers are uninterested in incorporating
VMS modifications into there stuff - and this may well be the case for EMACS,
which I haven't looked into - other individual and group maintainers are all
in favor of the widest possible audience for their tools. PERL, for example
(which I include here because it can be used under either its own Artistic
License or the GPL) has an active VMS developer contingent, and their patches
are put into the main source promptly and efficiently. I talked to Rasmus
Lerdorf a few weeks ago about VMS support for PHP and he was very interested
and supportive.
(Of course, we could make the logical distinction between "Stallman's
followers" and "member of the Free Software movement", with the diagnostic
being that if you're a dogmatic jerk who won't support any non-free OS you're
one of Stallman's followers; in that case, you're right.)
-- Alan
===============================================================================
Alan Winston --- WIN...@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL Phone: 650/926-3056
Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA 94309-0210
===============================================================================
Tom Linden
have been a more difficult port than to VMS.
Alan Greig
wrote:
>I use emacs 20.7.1 under W2K and I would have thought that that would
>have been a more difficult port than to VMS.
Not if it's built using cygwin (or even MS Posix) libraries. cygwin
gives you effectively a linux environment under Windows. Don't know if
W2K EMACS uses it though.
--
Alan
Roar Thronæs
: In article <87zo5xx...@leclerc.livingtorah.org>,
: Charles Sebold <cse...@ezl.com> writes:
:>On 21 Cheshvan 5762, Stefan Monnier wrote:
:>
:>> Has anybody worked on the VMS port of Emacs to get a more recent
:>> version than 19.28 working ? Would anybody be interested in porting
:>> Emacs-21 to VMS ?
: If it wasn't completely psycho-written shit code, you'd see a working
: copy by now.
: It's not C that's the problem per se. Can you say autoconfig? Built
: on C preprocessor dependancies that are little more than really ugly
: unix hackery. Everytime I rekindle my effort on this project, little
: time is lost before my blood boils. Targets are built in the same
: locations as the sources and, if a build fails, it can never be pro-
: perly restarted (and this is 19.28). Also, It might have been nice
: if the Stallman crowd had merged the VMS mods of 19.28 into the later
: versions but, since VMS is not a unix, it might have tainted their
: precious unixy shit code.
So you have not gotten 20.x to compile?
I have compiled it (eventually), but got problems with the dump.
(Borrowing makefiles and other stuff from the most recent 19.28 on VMS.
I think... it was some time ago)
-Roar Thronęs
Bill Gunshannon
And this brings up another (likely hair-brained) idea I have been kicking
around lately. Does anyone here remember "The Software Tools Virtual
Operating System"? What is the likelyhood that something like this could
be revived and expanded as a way (at least temporarily) to get some of the
needed user level applications to run on VMS??
When you look at the overall picture, the idea never flew in it's first
iteration for the same reason the P-machine concept withered on the vine.
The additional layer took too many resources and resulted in extremely
slow (in most cases) execution. Today, we have people happily running
Virtual Machines (ala teh P-machine) and even entire hardware emulators
that run at many times the speed of the original.
Is there anyone interested in discussing this?? Does anyone have a
copy of any of the original work?? (There was a VAX VMS port running.)
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bi...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Patrick Spinler
>
> I have compiled it (eventually), but got problems with the dump.
> (Borrowing makefiles and other stuff from the most recent 19.28 on VMS.
> I think... it was some time ago)
>
If you still have your work around - might you be willing to put it on
sourceforge (or some other public site ?)
I'd be willing to spend a few hours messing with your stuff to see if I
can move it a bit futher along.
Thanks,
-- Pat
--
This message does not represent the policies or positions
of the Mayo Foundation or its subsidiaries.
Patrick Spinler email: Spinler...@Mayo.EDU
Mayo Foundation phone: 507/284-9485
Charles Lane
> And this brings up another (likely hair-brained) idea I have been kicking
> around lately. Does anyone here remember "The Software Tools Virtual
> Operating System"? What is the likelyhood that something like this could
> be revived and expanded as a way (at least temporarily) to get some of the
> needed user level applications to run on VMS??
>
> When you look at the overall picture, the idea never flew in it's first
> iteration for the same reason the P-machine concept withered on the vine.
> The additional layer took too many resources and resulted in extremely
> slow (in most cases) execution. Today, we have people happily running
> Virtual Machines (ala teh P-machine) and even entire hardware emulators
> that run at many times the speed of the original.
>
> Is there anyone interested in discussing this?? Does anyone have a
> copy of any of the original work?? (There was a VAX VMS port running.)
I recall it somewhat, mostly from using the Software Tools Mail System.
It has the nice feature of running on both Unix and VMS systems, and
I still use it for mail. Probably the only one left, in fact...
--
Drexel University \V --Chuck Lane
======]---------->--------*------------<-------[===========
(215) 895-1545 _/ \ Particle Physics
FAX: (215) 895-5934 /\ /~~~~~~~~~~~ la...@duphy4.physics.drexel.edu
Roar Thronæs
: Roar Thronęs wrote:
:>
:> I have compiled it (eventually), but got problems with the dump.
:> (Borrowing makefiles and other stuff from the most recent 19.28 on VMS.
:> I think... it was some time ago)
:>
: If you still have your work around - might you be willing to put it on
: sourceforge (or some other public site ?)
Too messy.
: I'd be willing to spend a few hours messing with your stuff to see if I
: can move it a bit futher along.
Drop the word "few", and you'd probably also ought to know the file format.
My emacs doings are available at
ftp.nvg.ntnu.no:/pub/vms/emacs/emacs207.bck
(Warning, big file)
(Every source-file is there. Some changes dates back from when I compiled
emacs 19.28, some are newer, some are probably bad.)
What I had then was VMS/AXP 7.2-1 and CC 6.2.
If you want to see how it dumps, do a del/sin=1-nov-2001 *.*;* first.)
-Roar
Paul Repacholi
Do you want the PDP-11 version, or the Vax version? Or will IRAF do
instead? Have a look at IRAF, and see what it is inside...
--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.
Paul Repacholi
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2001 15:47:18 +0100 (MET), Phillip Helbig
> <HEL...@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> wrote:
> >No surprise here. Stallman's ideas that ANY software which is not
> >free is INHERENTLY EVIL makes it unattractive for him or his
> >followers to support VMS in any form.
> That's not quite correct unless Stallman has altered his views since
> I used to communicate with him back in the TOPS-20 EMACS days. It is
> an interpretation of his views given by many of his
> followers. Stallman explicitly asked for VMS people to help him keep
> the GNU stuff current on VMS back in the early days.
The only people RMS did this to was Apple, due to the 'look and feel'
cases. RMS asked people to not do Mac stuff, and to boycott Apple.
VMS was, way, way back, very well supported in the standard Emacs
distros. But since about V17 on, it has gone down hill.
BTW, the Emacs compiles are a LOT cleaner with 21.1. Still a lot of
crud to do, but it is starting to clean up a little. Oh, and the 21
stream forked off from 20.5 I was told.
Michael Joosten
Looked yesterday evening in the source of 20.4 (well, just what I had on
CDs at home), there is a separate directory for NT with a canned
config.h and NMAKE Nmakefiles (Nmakefile is, of course, an abbrev for
'not a Makefile'...) And no, the Win32 port is made with Visual C, not
the cygwin stuff. And the POSIX subsystem cannot be used, because then
you would not have any windows (not to mention networking).
On the plus side: all of the VMS 4 and 5 special low level functions are
still in the main src directory.
If it doesn't dump correctly, as Roar said, then it hopefully only seems
to be the 'usual' problem of either newer VMS versions introducing
slight changes (including libraries, linkers and so on), or somethig
else in the main code has poisoned the dump functionality.
This is also not unknown for the UNIXes, considering the comments in
other unexXXX.c modules...
--
Michael Joosten, SBS C-LAB, jo...@c-lab.de
Fuerstenallee 11, 33094 Paderborn, Germany
Phone: +49 5251 606127, Fax: +49 5251 606065
C-LAB is a cooperation of University Paderborn & SIEMENS
Tom Linden
wisest
way to "port' emacs is to provide a unix style environment, as was
originally envisioned
by the likes of Posix. Emacs is not the last program to be desired on VMS,
and why reinvent
the wheel for each port. Time to bite the bullet.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Joosten [mailto:jo...@c-lab.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 4:50 AM
> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
> Subject: Re: Emacs-2[01] on VMS
>
>
Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>
> : on C preprocessor dependancies that are little more than really ugly
> : unix hackery. Everytime I rekindle my effort on this project, little
> : time is lost before my blood boils. Targets are built in the same
Yes, we (Emacs maintainers) also suffer from it. But nobody has
had the courage (or knowledge) to do the switch to autoconf (which
would help on Unix, don't know about VMS).
> : if the Stallman crowd had merged the VMS mods of 19.28 into the later
> : versions but, since VMS is not a unix, it might have tainted their
> : precious unixy shit code.
Seeing all the #ifdefs for MacOS, W32, MS-DOS, VMS, UnixFoo, UnixBar
etc etc ad nauseam, I doubt that "tainting" was an issue. It might
have been a simple oversight (or maybe lack of legal paperwork).
> So you have not gotten 20.x to compile?
>
> I have compiled it (eventually), but got problems with the dump.
> (Borrowing makefiles and other stuff from the most recent 19.28 on VMS.
> I think... it was some time ago)
Did the executable work (without dumping) ?
It would really be great to get VMS support back up and running.
But we'd need someone who can maintain the VMS port.
BTW, what format is this "emacs207.bck" file ?
Stefan
Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>
> : It's not C that's the problem per se. Can you say autoconfig? Built
> : on C preprocessor dependancies that are little more than really ugly
> : unix hackery. Everytime I rekindle my effort on this project, little
> : time is lost before my blood boils. Targets are built in the same
Yes, we (Emacs maintainers) also suffer from it. But nobody has
had the courage (or knowledge) to do the switch to autoconf (which
would help on Unix, don't know about VMS).
> : if the Stallman crowd had merged the VMS mods of 19.28 into the later
> : versions but, since VMS is not a unix, it might have tainted their
> : precious unixy shit code.
Seeing all the #ifdefs for MacOS, W32, MS-DOS, VMS, UnixFoo, UnixBar
etc etc ad nauseam, I doubt that "tainting" was an issue. It might
have been a simple oversight (or maybe lack of legal paperwork).
> So you have not gotten 20.x to compile?
>
> I have compiled it (eventually), but got problems with the dump.
> (Borrowing makefiles and other stuff from the most recent 19.28 on VMS.
> I think... it was some time ago)
Did the executable work (without dumping) ?