Re: lost argument and doc string

[Tak Ota]

Wed, 13 Feb 2002 20:11:53 -0700 (MST): Richard Stallman <address@hidden> wrote:

> I see my recollection was mistaken: make-docfile reads the binary
> files directly.  Sorry if I caused any confusion.

I want to withdraw the previous several attempts of make-docfile.c
modification.  I now prostrate myself before the old wisdom.  We
should leave those elc files for make-docfile as elc.  The effort to
make make-docfile.c a true lisp interpreter does not seem to pay
off.  It is redundant as well as unnecessary.

I think the (lisp) variable definition below should be reverted.

2001-11-30  Andrew Innes  <address@hidden>

        * makefile.w32-in (FACE_SUPPORT):
        (MOUSE_SUPPORT):
        (FLOAT_SUPPORT):
        (WINNT_SUPPORT):
        (lisp): Reference .el files instead of .elc files, to simplify
        bootstrapping.
        ($(DOC)): Change dependency to just `make-docfile'.