Re: Installing the Emacs executable

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Ken Raeburn <raeburn@raeburn.org>
> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 01:05:07 -0400
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> On Apr 19, 2013, at 15:05, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > That's a different issue.  My question was about what "make install"
> > does with DOC, not what "make emacs" does in src.  We can install DOC
> > under the name DOC-XX.YY.ZZ without changing what happens in src and
> > in etc of the build tree.
> 
> I've long wondered if it would be better to get rid of the DOC file altogether and keep the documentation in the executable image.
> 
> With GCC and ELF systems, it's not that hard to compile the C doc strings into a specially named section

Beware: you might get into the same situation that the Windows build
is today -- you will be unable to strip the resulting executable as
part of "make install-strip", because 'strip' doesn't know anything
about the section you add.

In any case, I thought the tendency was to stay away of tricks that
are too specific to binary formats, to avoid re-living the unexec
problem...