From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Browning Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Building emacs with and without X -- packaging question. Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 15:01:11 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <87k7p6aooo.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> References: <87u1oo6xhm.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <8962-Fri31May2002214124+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <87elfs6spr.fsf@wesley.springies.com> <7999-Sat01Jun2002102420+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <878z5zvtlf.fsf@wesley.springies.com> <7680-Sat01Jun2002195058+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <87wut79cb7.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <87r8jeapfk.fsf@wesley.springies.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1023739405 9457 127.0.0.1 (10 Jun 2002 20:03:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 20:03:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 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 17HVNs-0002SQ-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 22:03:24 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17HVkr-00011U-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 22:27:09 +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 17HVNZ-0001rV-00; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:03:05 -0400 Original-Received: from dsl-209-87-109-2.constant.com ([209.87.109.2] helo=defaultvalue.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17HVLl-0001en-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:01:13 -0400 Original-Received: from raven.i.defaultvalue.org (raven.i.defaultvalue.org [192.168.1.7]) by defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F25A06E; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 15:01:12 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by raven.i.defaultvalue.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 91330504; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 15:01:11 -0500 (CDT) Original-To: Alan Shutko In-Reply-To: <87r8jeapfk.fsf@wesley.springies.com> (Alan Shutko's message of "Mon, 10 Jun 2002 15:45:03 -0400") Original-Lines: 28 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090006 (Oort Gnus v0.06) Emacs/21.2 (i386-pc-linux-gnu) 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:4719 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4719 Alan Shutko writes: > ) But if you did two separate clean builds, the build id in the > version would be the same and they would use the same file, and have > problems... I think it uses offsets or something. Do you know what constitutes a "clean build"? I'm guessing that anything that deletes the existing DOC-* file would cause you to get the "same file". If you're suggesting that I just reconfigure, then re-build without a make clean, I'm wondering if that might be asking for trouble in the long run, even if it works right now. However, if that's OK, I'm happy to proceed that direction. Oh, and I'm also fine with just trying to handle things the way RH handled them, but if there's some way the developers know they'd like this "fixed", that's even better. Off the top of my head, I wonder if something as simple as naming the DOC file with a timestamp might be enough -- i.e. DOC-20020610-231201 or similar. Thanks -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org Previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C 64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD