Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!rice!husc6!encore!pierson From: pierson@encore.com (Dan L. Pierson) Newsgroups: comp.emacs Subject: Re: GNU emacs size Message-ID: Date: 7 Feb 90 16:50:29 GMT References: <1009@abvax.UUCP> <367@peyote.cactus.org> <47565@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> Sender: news@Encore.COM Organization: Encore Computer Corporation Lines: 32 In-reply-to: casey@gauss.llnl.gov's message of 6 Feb 90 23:17:36 GMT From: casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom) Date: 6 Feb 90 23:17:36 GMT I'm really not advocating throwing all the gunk away, I'd just like it separated out and, if possible, convince GNU to move it off to an entirely separate distribution tree. I'd like to pick up a GNU emacs distribution and only get a system editor. Not 3Mb of randomness (a guess) plus a debugger. If I want the 3Mb of randomness or the debugger, I can pick up those trees separately and do a (make; make install; make clean) in their directories. But what is junk? If we agree for the sake of argument that an obsolete version of gdb, zippy and friends, and the sex man pages are junk there is still a very large questionable area. Many people would claim that most of the *.el files in the lisp directory are junk. While I have removed these for *very* memory tight installations, I disagree strongly. The *.el files are needed in a decent installation for at least two reasons: they are the only decent documentation for many facilities, and they are needed as a base for user customization and extension. Other people claim that the the on line manual is junk. Again, I disagree. -- dan In real life: Dan Pierson, Encore Computer Corporation, Research UUCP: {talcott,linus,necis,decvax}!encore!pierson Internet: pierson@encore.com