[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: redundant DOC files
|
From: |
Leo |
|
Subject: |
Re: redundant DOC files |
|
Date: |
Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:22:44 +0000 |
|
User-agent: |
No Gnus v0.6, Emacs/22.0.92.8 (2007-01-20), Fedora 6 gnu/linux |
On 2007-01-20, Eli Zaretskii said:
>> From: Leo <address@hidden>
>> Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 15:01:39 +0000
>>
>> But when one does make install/bootstrap, only one emacs version is
>> installed while *ALL* DOC-* versions are installed
>
> I think the previous emacs-* binaries are supposed to be already in
> place in the installation directory, from previous installs.
But why would an old installed emacs-* binaries needs the new one to
bring their DOC files.
The current situation is like the example as follows:
emacs-22.0.92.8 installs:
DOC-22.0.92.8
DOC-22.0.92.7
DOC-22.0.92.6
DOC-22.0.92.5
DOC-22.0.92.4
DOC-22.0.92.3
DOC-22.0.92.2
DOC-22.0.92.1
emacs-22.0.92.7 installs
DOC-22.0.92.7
DOC-22.0.92.6
DOC-22.0.92.5
DOC-22.0.92.4
DOC-22.0.92.3
DOC-22.0.92.2
DOC-22.0.92.1
emacs-22.0.92.6 installs
DOC-22.0.92.6
DOC-22.0.92.5
DOC-22.0.92.4
DOC-22.0.92.3
DOC-22.0.92.2
DOC-22.0.92.1
......
Shouldn't it be something like this:
emacs-22.0.92.8 installs:
DOC-22.0.92.8
emacs-22.0.92.7 installs:
DOC-22.0.92.7
emacs-22.0.92.6 installs:
DOC-22.0.92.6
......
In this case if you have old emacs-* binaries the corresponding DOC-*
are also available. And if you don't you get a cleaner install.
--
Leo <sdl.web AT gmail.com> (GPG Key: 9283AA3F)
Re: redundant DOC files, Stefan Monnier, 2007/01/21
Re: redundant DOC files, Miles Bader, 2007/01/21