From xemacs-m  Wed Mar  5 09:02:00 1997
Received: from crystal.WonderWorks.COM (crystal.WonderWorks.com [192.203.206.1])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA27675
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 09:01:59 -0600 (CST)
Received: by crystal.WonderWorks.COM 
	id QQcfom09986; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 10:01:57 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 10:01:57 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <QQcfom09986.199703051501@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com>
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: (very) little startup screen patch
In-Reply-To: <kighgiqenvv.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
References: <x2u3mtp12i.fsf@lemcbed.lem.uni-karlsruhe.de>
	<m2afoide5c.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
	<kighgiqenvv.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
X-Face: /cA45WHG7jWq>(O3&Z57Y<"WsX5ddc,4c#w0F*zrV#=M
        0@~@,s;b,aMtR5Sqs"+nU.z^CSFQ9t`z2>W,S,]:[+2^
        Nbf6v4g>!&,7R4Ot4Wg{&tm=WX7P["9%a)_da48-^tGy
        ,qz]Z,Zz\{E.,]'EO+F)@$KtF&V

Hrvoje Niksic writes:
 > Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com> writes:
 > 
 > > A better solution (IMO) would be to knock out the `[Lucid]' (who
 > > cares?  I don't),
 > 
 > I agree with this.  Everyone's been checking for "XEmacs\\|Lucid" for
 > years now.

I don't believe the "everyone" part.  I changed a version check
that looked for Lucid in my own code within the last two weeks.

If you're going to strip something out of the version strip
something that has no known use, which I think means the hostname
and the build date.  Anyone see or have code that uses those?

