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: Building emacs with and without X -- packaging question. Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 17:03:56 +0300 (IDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <20020613154017.EA01.LEKTU@terra.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1023977482 26964 127.0.0.1 (13 Jun 2002 14:11:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:11:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Rob Browning , 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 17IVJq-00070n-00 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 16:11:22 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17IViA-0006X5-00 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 16:36:30 +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 17IVHg-0000O5-00; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 10:09:08 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17IVEi-0000Dy-00 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 10:06:05 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA01133; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 17:03:56 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Juanma Barranquero In-Reply-To: <20020613154017.EA01.LEKTU@terra.es> 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:4830 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4830 On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Juanma Barranquero wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:42:05 +0300 (IDT), Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > What maintenance burden did you have in mind? All we need is make sure > > make-docfile is invoked with the same list of files on all platforms. > > Hmm, I'm not sure, but I've seen that DOC data is extracted sometimes > from .el files and others from .elc, and from .c files in Windows, but .o > files in GNU/Linux... These are technicalities. You will see that make-docfile always reads the *.c files, on all platforms, even if you submit *.o files to it. I'm not quite sure why the Windows Makefile's use *.c files directly, but I'm guessing that it's something trivial, like the fact that there are no *.o files on Windows. > OTOH, there are .elc and .o/.obj files which conceptually cannot be > built on Windows, because they require support programs or libraries not > present, etc. The distribution always comes with all *.c files and with all *.elc files already compiled. So there should be no problem to build a system-independent DOC file. All we need is decide on the contents of the various lists of files used by src/Makefile.in to build DOC. > Also, I think in Unix/Linux environments the list of files can be > perhaps automatically maintained, but Windows shells are pathetic and > the list is manually constructed. That problem already exists. The issue we are discussing doesn't add any significant addition to it. > > The interesting question is why are doc strings from ucs-tables seen on > > Unix and GNU/Linux systems, but not on Windows? > > I don't understand. Are you asking why the doc strings are not seen on > Windows, or why lisp/international/ucs-tables is not used to generate > DOC on Windows? The latter.