From xemacs-m  Thu Sep 18 09:06:58 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 JAA22542
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 09:06:55 -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 KAA08110
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 10:07:39 -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 KAA00205
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 10:06:23 -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 KAA10833 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 10:06:23 -0400
Received: by spssunp.spspme.ml.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id KAA00019; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 10:06:22 -0400
To: XEmacs Beta List <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: Re: (eventual) [success][patch] Bern sparc-sun-solaris2.5.1
References: <m2sov4pezr.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> <ocrafhbpz2n.fsf@ml.com> <m23en3zgy9.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
X-Face: ByE+UMAp1klWR3?\RNGx(A-~Ri!YT%C6M!sxoJL+.;9`Q/|+dj7[KR>gGMyV.2qZeot0NI`4\MA^_Qg`F9=+Ox&zaE?Y9dV%F~Xzf';Zyk2Aobs.uu^Ey0_C6^~q';G#$HkA!ZAHXPpG-"*|Dd*Z4U$4y{{aI0c%75}i~Of(jxYtI[uIpYF<*Zoe|\*/ufb
X-Y-Zippy: I am NOT a nut....
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Colin Rafferty <craffert@ml.com>
Date: 18 Sep 1997 10:06:20 -0400
In-Reply-To: SL Baur's message of "17 Sep 1997 15:57:50 -0700"
Message-ID: <ocr67rypvhf.fsf@ml.com>
Lines: 45
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.3(beta21) - "Bern"

SL Baur writes:
> Colin Rafferty <craffert@ml.com> writes:

>> Specifically, man/tm/Makefile calls xemacs directly.  Since the
>> application named xemacs on my path is 19.13, this is a problem for me.

> The `xemacs' being called here is *required* to be an XEmacs/Mule
> version, otherwise it doesn't matter and can be almost anything ...

The problem is that it assumes that whatever xemacs happens to be on my
path is the correct one.

>> I think that the correct way to deal with this is to define EMACS in the
>> top-level Makefile as `build-path'/src/xemacs, and pass it down.
>> Instead, I patched man/tm/Makefile to point to the correct one.

> No, a correct patch would be to detect whether `xemacs' is XEmacs/Mule 
> and avoid building those .info files if it is not.

I disagree completely.  There already is a valid xemacs in src/xemacs.

When I say `make XXX' in a build tree, and the build needs to use
xemacs, I expect that it runs the xemacs that has been built.  Anything
else is inconsistant.

For example, what happens to the new installer who only has XEmacs19.x?
Or the one who doesn't even have it yet?

Rather than doing the the build in one step:

    ./configure ; make all info install-only

He will have to do a little two-step:

    ./configure ; make all install-only ; make info install-only

This is not obvious at all.

I believe that any call to an emacs in the build process should be to
the just-built version.  Anything else is inconsistant and error-prone.

-- 
#!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)

