[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Utterly painless arch?
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Utterly painless arch? |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:56:25 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 08:32:09PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Yes. Emacs, for one. It may even be a defined convention somewhere
> > that `$EDITOR +<n> <file>' ought to go to line <n> of <file> in one's
> > favourite editor.
>
> XEmacs at least has no trouble with it. I don't know if GNU Emacs is
> broken in this respect.
It's not.
-Miles
--
.Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Utterly painless arch?, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Utterly painless arch?, Adam Spiers, 2003/09/14
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Utterly painless arch?, Bruce Stephens, 2003/09/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Utterly painless arch?, Andrew Suffield, 2003/09/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Utterly painless arch?,
Miles Bader <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Utterly painless arch?, John Goerzen, 2003/09/10
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Utterly painless arch?, Neil Stevens, 2003/09/09