[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: emacs -Q not documented
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: emacs -Q not documented |
Date: |
Tue, 05 Apr 2005 23:02:41 -0400 |
It is intended to be an option turn off all "extra features".
On what criterion are these features "extra"?
But most important, running emacs -Q when debugging redisplay problems
makes it much easier to know what's going on.
Why does the blinking cursor relate to this?
Just because we cannot find a long name for it -- that's silly, IMO!
The difficulty in finding a long name for it reflected a lack of
apparent coherence of the functionality of the option. Nobody
could see what it was good for. That is why I thought of removing
it or changing it.
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, (continued)
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Robert J. Chassell, 2005/04/05
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, David Kastrup, 2005/04/05
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Kim F. Storm, 2005/04/05
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, David Kastrup, 2005/04/05
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Kim F. Storm, 2005/04/05
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, David Kastrup, 2005/04/05
- Re: emacs -Q not documented,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Kim F. Storm, 2005/04/06
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Nick Roberts, 2005/04/06
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Richard Stallman, 2005/04/06
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Werner LEMBERG, 2005/04/06
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Kim F. Storm, 2005/04/06
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, David Kastrup, 2005/04/06
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Kim F. Storm, 2005/04/06
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Andreas Schwab, 2005/04/06
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, David Kastrup, 2005/04/06
- Re: emacs -Q not documented, Stefan Monnier, 2005/04/06