Re: Removing MULTI_KBOARD

[Chong Yidong]

Jason Rumney <address@hidden> writes:

> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
>>> You have handwaved that.  Can you please actually explain why you think 
>>> that?
>>> I have explained it is not a problem.
>> 
>> How it is not a problem, if the MSDOS port does not support
>> MULTI_KBOARD?  I must have missed the explanation, please repeat it.
>
> If anyone is going to get the MSDOS port working again, then the effort
> in getting it working with MULTI_KBOARD is going to be similar to or
> less than the work required to get the rest of post-multi-tty Emacs
> working without MULTI_KBOARD. The reason W32 and Mac now use
> MULTI_KBOARD is that the multi-tty changes basically forced it. The
> changes were minor compared with what else needs doing to revive the
> MSDOS port after the unicode and multi-tty merges.

That's my impression as well.

It would have been nice for Dan to mention he was removing MULTI_KBOARD,
but I can understand the reasoning for what he did (maybe he was rushing
for time due to the feature freeze deadline too).  So let's keep his
changes.