From xemacs-m  Thu Sep  4 10:56:00 1997
Received: from wfdutilgw.ml.com (wfdutilf01.ml.com [206.3.74.31])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA05480
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:55:59 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ml1.ml.com ([199.201.57.130])
	by wfdutilgw.ml.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/MLgw-3.03) with ESMTP id LAA07246
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 11:56:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from commpost.ml.com (commpost.ml.com [146.125.4.24])
	by ml1.ml.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/MLml4-2.07) with SMTP id LAA19925
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 11:55:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from spssunp.spspme.ml.com (spssunp.spspme.ml.com [192.168.111.13]) by commpost.ml.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA15460 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 11:55:15 -0400
Received: by spssunp.spspme.ml.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id LAA04451; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 11:55:15 -0400
To: XEmacs Beta List <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]  Re: Kyiv package failure under sparc-sun-solaris2.5.1
References: <ocrbu2al4j1.fsf@ml.com> 	<m2bu2a5cpc.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 	<ocr7mcykqza.fsf@ml.com> 	<m24t81vqut.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 	<ocrg1rlgnmm.fsf@ml.com> <QQdfoh29187.199709041546@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
X-Face: ""xJff<P[R~C67]V?J|X^Dr`YigXK|;1wX<rt^>%{>hr-{:QXl"Xk2O@@(+F]e{"%EYQiW@mUuvEsL>=mx96j12qW[%m;|:B^n{J8k?Mz[K1_+H;$v,nYx^1o_=4M,L+]FIU~[[`-w~~xsy-BX,?tAF_.8u&0y*@aCv;a}Y'{w@#*@iwAl?oZpvvv
X-Y-Zippy: I smell a RANCID CORN DOG!
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Colin Rafferty <craffert@ml.com>
Date: 04 Sep 1997 11:55:14 -0400
In-Reply-To: Kyle Jones's message of "Thu, 4 Sep 1997 11:46:35 -0400 (EDT)"
Message-ID: <ocrsovlxee5.fsf@ml.com>
Lines: 24
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.65/XEmacs 20.3(beta19) - "Kiev"

Kyle Jones writes:
> Colin Rafferty writes:
>> SL Baur writes:
>> > Colin Rafferty <craffert@ml.com> writes:
>> >> SL Baur writes:
>> 
>> >> As far a what to do in Tirana XEmacs, I would say that auto-autoloads
>> >> should be loaded from the entire package-path, just in case there is a
>> >> new package globally, but no one re-dumped XEmacs.
>> 
>> > That must be done carefully.  There are too many complaints about
>> > XEmacs slow startup speed to do this without thinking things through.
>> 
>> Why are people starting XEmacs so often that they complain about startup
>> speed?
>
> They are complaining because FSF Emacs starts up faster.

Which is ironic since I got the basis of my argument from an old rms
posting some years back.  His response was basically, "live with it."
Not really surprising, is it?

-- 
Colin

