From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: NT Emacs make problem.. Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 07:48:17 +0300 (IDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200206120234.g5C2YR304329@aztec.santafe.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1023857503 32258 127.0.0.1 (12 Jun 2002 04:51:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 04:51:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: deego@glue.umd.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17I06g-0008OB-00 for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 06:51:42 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17I0UK-0003Q9-00 for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 07:16:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17I06R-0003iI-00; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 00:51:27 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17I05F-0003cJ-00; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 00:50:13 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA14511; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 07:48:18 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Richard Stallman In-Reply-To: <200206120234.g5C2YR304329@aztec.santafe.edu> Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:4779 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4779 On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Richard Stallman wrote: > Since this is so short, it would be nice not to have a separate file > for it. If we put this into INSTALL, would it be conspicuous enough > for people to notice it? I am not sure. If people would overlook it > there, that would be a reason for a separat file. INSTALL is a very large file, so I'm afraid this info will get lost there. I think a separate file is better, especially since more info will probably be added to it as time passes.