From xemacs-m  Wed Mar  5 03:49:01 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 DAA25538
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 03:49:00 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from steve@localhost)
	by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA24364;
	Wed, 5 Mar 1997 02:00:30 -0800
Mail-Copies-To: never
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: A few newbie beta questions
References: <9703050916.AA17614@ndsoft.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: "Amir J. Katz"'s message of Wed, 5 Mar 97 11:16:39 IST
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.105)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: 05 Mar 1997 02:00:29 -0800
Message-ID: <m2lo82odz6.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
Lines: 55
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.17/XEmacs 20.1

Amir J Katz writes:

> 1. The INSTALL file refers to 'sunos4shr' as a valid SunOS
>    configuration. 'configure' rejects it. 'sparc-sun-sunos4.1.3' works
>    fine.

This got renamed some time back.  I left the documentation updates to
someone on the affected systems, but it never got done, I guess.

> 2. The INSTALL should say that SunOS 4.1.4 (the most recent
>    SunOS version, and probably the last one ever) works fine with
>    'sparc-sun-sunos4.1.3'. Does it really? I'll see when I'm done.

I don't know.

> 3. The 18 MB tar file in the beta, when untarred, expands to
>    'xemacs-19.15-b96/*'.
>    However, the patch to b97 assumes everything is under
>    xemacs-19.15. (Yes, I'm aware of the -p1 option to 'patch').
>    I created a symlink. Maybe this should be documented somewhere.

You are supposed to use the -p1 option to patch.  Patching is lightly
documented because (sigh, giving away secrets) I want to discourage
/casual/ usage of it.  It's so easy to get things wrong, and the
source tree must be exactly as you untarred it for patches to work
correctly.  That being said, I have a linux kernel source tree that
has survived over 80 successive patches without a serious glitch.

The patches now have xemacs-19.15 (and xemacs-20.0) as the top level
directory because that is how I've named them in CVS and that is how
the output of `cvs rdiff' looks.

> 4. Once I apply the b97 patch, should I rename the top-level dir to 
>    'xemacs-19.15-b97' ?

That's up to you.

> 5. A more general policy question: When one of the beta guys posts a
>    patch, should I apply it, or wait for the next official bXXX
>    patch?

That's up to you.  Just remember to reverse all patches you apply if
you wish to upgrade by patching.

One question that you didn't ask, but does need answering:

Do I need to track both 19.15 and 20.x?

No, that's up to you.  There's so much disk space involved in even one
beta XEmacs, that I don't expect anyone to track both versions.
Getting so close to a 19.15 release I'm grateful for any special
attention to that version.
-- 
steve@miranova.com baur
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be billed at $250/message.

