From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: bad tool-bar icons in Emacs 22.1 release Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:39:57 +0200 Message-ID: <4688111D.6090501@gmail.com> References: <466C80A3.1040102@gnu.org> <466D34C5.8050604@gnu.org> <4686267A.8050001@swipnet.se> <4686F6F9.1070307@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1183322570 6943 80.91.229.12 (1 Jul 2007 20:42:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:42:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jan.h.d@swipnet.se, jasonr@gnu.org, Reiner.Steib@gmx.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 01 22:42:47 2007 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I56Fo-0002Th-4L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:42:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I56Fn-00040d-N2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:42:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I56DQ-0006tJ-1M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:16 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I56DM-0006oY-Bi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:13 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I56DL-0006o3-Pi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:11 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.213]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I56DH-0005HP-9g; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:07 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-133-189.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.133.189]:64843 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1I56DF-0002HI-6q; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:40:05 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.4) Gecko/20070604 Thunderbird/2.0.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000752-8, 2007-07-01), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.133.189 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1I56DF-0002HI-6q. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1I56DF-0002HI-6q a370ba28b83c67edc0b44f38510928f2 X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:74146 Archived-At: Richard Stallman wrote: > If the libraries are not included in the w32 Emacs binary download file > would it not be better to just link to their locations? > > No, because every additional step needed for installation tends > to discourage a certain fraction of people from even trying. Is not that a good argument for including them in the binaries then?