From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:40 -0400 Message-ID: References: <8763unt4nz.fsf@gmx.de> <87hce7rmbg.fsf@gmx.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1208028130 19045 80.91.229.12 (12 Apr 2008 19:22:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 19:22:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii , Peter_Dyballa@Freenet.DE To: Sven Joachim Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 12 21:22:43 2008 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 1JklJ9-0003xg-Mt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:22:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JklIV-0000WO-Kj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JklIR-0000T8-1X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:55 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JklIO-0000O1-WB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:54 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JklIO-0000NP-D2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:52 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JklIO-0001cZ-5S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166] helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JklIN-0004pa-WB for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JklIK-0001bn-4S for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:51 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JklID-0001Zv-BC; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:41 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhQFAHuoAEhMCqsI/2dsb2JhbACBXaht X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,647,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="18391234" Original-Received: from smtp.pppoe.ca (HELO smtp.teksavvy.com) ([65.39.196.238]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 12 Apr 2008 15:21:40 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home ([76.10.171.8]) by smtp.teksavvy.com (Internet Mail Server v1.0) with ESMTP id SXH78540; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:40 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 7BB0B832A; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:21:40 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87hce7rmbg.fsf@gmx.de> (Sven Joachim's message of "Sat, 12 Apr 2008 19:54:11 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:95074 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:22000 Archived-At: > I'm not certain I understand that; make clean removes all the emacs* > binaries from the build tree and therefore should also remove the then > useless DOC-* files. It probably makes sense to reset the build number > to 1 after that, doesn't it? Or what do you mean? Yes, that makes sense. Note that nowadays it's not even clear there's much point in having DOC-: we could just use a single DOC file: Emacs is able to gracefully react to a DOC file that has been changed. I've been using such a setup for several years now, and occasionally it fails to notice that the file has changed and ends up showing some other docstring than the one intended, but this is rather rare (it happened to me recently and I felt like "Wow, so the practice does agree with the theory after all"). Stefan