Re: Fatal error (11). Emacs/ Linux hosed my very long document.

[kier]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:46:59 +0000, wlcna wrote:

> "Mike Cox" <mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
> 3d6111f1.0409161437.30ef8b7d@posting.google.com">news:3d6111f1.0409161437.30ef8b7d@posting.google.com...
>>I recently switched to xemacs as my default word processor so I could
>> do formatting in TEX for a very long document.  Most recently I've
> [...]
> 
> I don't really care about this discussion because I don't like/can't stand 
> emacs (I use vi and vim) and also initially thought the o.p. was a complete 
> liar and troll, but having looked at his other posts and his posting 
> history, I no longer believe this and moreover...  I NOW THINK this guy has 
> a point:  xemacs is a pile of crap if this guy was editing for five hours 
> and it crashed out of nowhere on him.

The OP is a known liar and troll - as you would know if you'd really
checked him out.

> 
> I think xemacs has a problem here because I've NEVER ONCE experienced a 
> crash with vim, whether it be using it from the command line or gui.  Not 
> once, and it's the only editor I've been using for years, and I don't use it 
> in any plain, stripped down versions, but pretty well feature-maxed 
> versions, under multiple operating systems and windowing environments.  This 
> guy was editing for five hours and he gets a crash "out of nowhere."

Bollocks. It never happened. He made it up. 

> 
> Obviously, lightning does strike, but this person is not describing that - 
> he's describing a perfectly functioning machine, and the only thing crashing 
> is what? Xemacs.

He claims.

> 
> The xemacs people actually do owe a response.  Is xemacs simply the same 
> kind of crap made by Microsoft?  This user's experience would seem to 
> indicate that may be so.

I use Xemacs all the time, it never gives me trouble, and it autosaves
regularly, so you would only lose a small portion of any document in the
event of a crash. And manually saving is a simple matter of a couple of
keystrokes - CTRL-X-S. How to save a document is the first thing any
sensible writer learns.

> 
> One can call him an idiot for not saving, but his whole intent was to USE 
> Linux tools to REVIEW them.  This makes sense.  And putting himself in the 
> risky situation he put himself in makes a bit of sense also.  He got burned, 
> his review will now reflect that, people will learn from his getting burned. 
> He will not gloss over this fact.

Rot. He's a lying troll. He does this constantly to wind people up, and to
take in people like you.

> 
> I also just read the xemacs/lemacs versus emacs/RMS stuff on jwz.org and I 
> must say this jwz person sounds like a prize putz, as well as the Richard 
> Gabriel person and all of those Lucid people.  I find it hard to believe 
> that there were people defending this obviously MERCENARY, SELF-PROMOTING, 
> SHALLOW bunch within that discussion.  While I don't like emacs, I would 
> completely take his side in that discussion.  It's obvious inside of the 
> discussion itself that the xemacs people were determined to try to blow the 
> original emacs out of the water.  Quite bad behavior, as rms himself said, 
> though even then without much rancor (unlike the other side).

Well, I don't know much about that, I'll admit. But though I use emacs
sometimes, I like Xemacs better. But emacs is great when not in X.

> 
> I would think the o.p. might try regular emacs and report his experiences 
> there, since the problem could simply be with the non-standard, separately 
> maintained version he chose to use, xemacs, which may simply be a 
> crash-prone pile of crap compared to regular emacs.

No, it's not.

-- 
Kier