From xemacs-m  Sat Mar 22 23:41:02 1997
Received: from altair.xemacs.org (steve@xemacs.miranova.com [206.190.83.19])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA03844
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sat, 22 Mar 1997 23:41:01 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from steve@localhost)
	by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA12110;
	Sat, 22 Mar 1997 21:52:39 -0800
Mail-Copies-To: never
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: 19.15 Binary kit build instructions, call for builders
References: <m2913f8ga6.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> <QQcibl08230.199703230525@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
X-Url: http://www.miranova.com/%7Esteve/
X-Face: #!T9!#9s-3o8)*uHlX{Ug[xW7E7Wr!*L46-OxqMu\xz23v|R9q}lH?cRS{rCNe^'[`^sr5"
 f8*@r4ipO6Jl!:Ccq<xoV[Qz2u8<8-+Vwf2gzJ44lf_/y9OaQ`@#Q65{U4/TC)i2`~/M&QI$X>p:9I
 OSS'2{-)-4wBnVeg0S\O4Al@)uC[pD|+
X-Attribution: sb
From: Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com>
In-Reply-To: Kyle Jones's message of Sun, 23 Mar 1997 00:25:45 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: 22 Mar 1997 21:52:37 -0800
Message-ID: <m2ybbfm9y2.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
Lines: 19
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.35/XEmacs 20.1(beta10)

Kyle Jones writes:

> Steven L Baur (plagiarizing Chuck Thompson) writes:

>> I'm relaxing the static!, static!, static! rule somewhat.

> Maybe it's my memory that's bad, but it seems to me every time
> we've tried this, there have been blowups reported.  We're
> shooting for turnkey operation with the binaries, so why risk
> it?  I can still hear Jamie laughing.

I've only been through the 19.14 release process.  Should they be 100%
static?  Lead me.  The worrisome problem I have with 100% static
executables is the impossibility of dealing with system security
patches.  I suppose we can always update the stuff on ftp.xemacs.org
if something really bad like the recent BSD locale bug crops up again.
-- 
steve@miranova.com baur
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be billed at $250/message.

