From xemacs-m  Tue Sep  2 21:09:46 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 VAA28911
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Tue, 2 Sep 1997 21:09:45 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from steve@localhost)
	by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA21992;
	Tue, 2 Sep 1997 19:13:40 -0700
Mail-Copies-To: never
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: [Q] The best way to build/install XEmacs for different binaries?
References: <199709020743.KAA24937@merlin.ornet.co.il> 	<bylo1gxbv4.fsf@midget.math.ethz.ch> 	<m2lo1f39hn.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> <199709030115.SAA02808@xemacs.eng.sun.com>
X-Face: `'%\i;ySOu]g?NlziJSk_$&@]KP`}~PEQPjZ5;nxSaDW_o$4+4%Ab]%Ifw3ZR;7TIT3,O,'
 @2{L;]ox6kc;$_5kU'n**9vFg-]eV~GbxSVCx|(s%uR[],*:^WKmC`B}(;|k9/m]gwt?&`t;^rfCJg
 khHH>pP1W\)xM0U@!FNDD72{3fDP$PkBhx^7Z?-WxH6DbFN:QOnT`llzW}VGdYv;n9lzljQvKTIBhQ
 YuV
X-Attribution: sb
From: SL Baur <steve@xemacs.org>
In-Reply-To: Martin Buchholz's message of "Tue, 2 Sep 1997 18:15:07 -0700"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: 02 Sep 1997 19:13:40 -0700
Message-ID: <m2zppvw3e3.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
Lines: 21
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.65/XEmacs 20.3(beta19) - "Kiev"

Martin Buchholz <mrb@Eng.Sun.COM> writes:

>>>>>> "sb" == SL Baur <steve@xemacs.org> writes:

sb> I don't recommend using `make distclean'.  That is primarily for
sb> the maintainer prior to generating tarballs for distribution.
sb> `make clean' is better.

> I disagree, and am surprised that you wouldn't recommend `make
> distclean' for the explicit job of returning to that pristine
> just-untarred state.

I don't seem to need it and it has the added disadvantage of requiring
a full run of configure.

I also reserve the right to change `make distclean' to start removing
.elcs in the future. :-)

> From the GNU coding standards:

Whatever.

