From xemacs-m  Wed Mar 19 13:23:39 1997
Received: from mailhost.lanl.gov (mailhost.lanl.gov [128.165.3.12])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA27598
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 19 Mar 1997 13:23:37 -0600 (CST)
Received: from branagh.ta52.lanl.gov (branagh.ta52.lanl.gov [128.165.144.9]) by mailhost.lanl.gov (8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id MAA28143 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 19 Mar 1997 12:23:37 -0700 (MST)
Received: by branagh.ta52.lanl.gov (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id MAA06917; Wed, 19 Mar 1997 12:18:59 -0700
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 12:18:59 -0700
Message-Id: <199703191918.MAA06917@branagh.ta52.lanl.gov>
From: "John A. Turner" <turner@branagh.ta52.lanl.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: 19.15-b101: Failure on Solaris 2.5.1 / SunPro C 4.2
In-Reply-To: <m2sp1rbuqh.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
References: <199703191735.KAA06668@branagh.ta52.lanl.gov>
	<m2sp1rbuqh.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
Reply-To: turner@lanl.gov

Steven L Baur writes:
 > John A Turner writes:
 > 
 > >   What's going on?  Is it something I'm doing?
 > 
 > I'm not sure.  The way the build works now, you should be executing
 > only the freshly built XEmacs and that appears not to be the case here.
 > 
 > It has worked smoothly enough on the builds I've done.

I haven't had any build probs in a long long time, and the process
has become fairly automatic for me, so this was quite a surprise.
Basically, I have a script that runs configure, then I do 
gmake all-elc.

 > > o Also, could someone explain the efs-patches stuff.  I guess I've
 > >   missed what's going on there.  What are they for?  Should I be
 > >   applying them or are they already in, e.g. b101?  Sorry, been busy and
 > >   haven't paid close attention.
 > 
 > They are a series of patches to autoload efs a little bit tighter into 
 > the default environment.  They blow me dead out of the water.  Michael 
 > Sperber can't duplicate my troubles.

So do you want people to try them and report on results?  I assume
that even if these don't pan out that efs will be included as it is,
right?

-John

