From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Building emacs with and without X -- packaging question.
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 15:04:32 -0600 (MDT)
Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
Message-ID: <200206012104.g51L4WX17346@aztec.santafe.edu>
References: <87u1oo6xhm.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1022965606 30151 127.0.0.1 (1 Jun 2002 21:06:46 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 21:06:46 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Return-path: <emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian))
	id 17EG5G-0007qC-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Sat, 01 Jun 2002 23:06:46 +0200
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 17EGNu-0002tc-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Sat, 01 Jun 2002 23:26:02 +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 17EG4h-0003dU-00; Sat, 01 Jun 2002 17:06:11 -0400
Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119])
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 17EG38-0003S9-00; Sat, 01 Jun 2002 17:04:34 -0400
Original-Received: from aztec.santafe.edu (aztec [192.12.12.49])
	by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g51L4WV14371;
	Sat, 1 Jun 2002 15:04:32 -0600 (MDT)
Original-Received: (from rms@localhost)
	by aztec.santafe.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.9.3) id g51L4WX17346;
	Sat, 1 Jun 2002 15:04:32 -0600 (MDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: aztec.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@aztec using -f
Original-To: rlb@defaultvalue.org
In-Reply-To: <87u1oo6xhm.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> (message from Rob
	Browning on Fri, 31 May 2002 12:25:09 -0500)
Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:4546
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4546

      However this
    wouldn't be safe if the files in the with and without-x install trees
    are likely to be different in important ways (i.e. different sets of
    files, binary incompatibilities in .elc files, etc.).

I don't think this changes anything but the Emacs executable, but I
cannot be sure.  It is definitely possible in principle for a .el file
to test for the presence of X at compile time.  I think that would be
an unclean method, and I think if we find such a case we should fix
it.