Subject: Re: gimp depends on emacs?
To: Berndt Josef Wulf <email@example.com>
From: Hubert Feyrer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/03/1999 16:29:13
On Mon, 3 May 1999, Berndt Josef Wulf wrote:
> Wouldn't it be more efficient to include the missing files with the patches
> avoiding to have to download and build emacs just for the sake of creating
> two doc files? Besides preserving disk-space, it will save a lot of download
> time, bandwidth and money, especially who have to use a standard modem
> and pay an ISP to connect to the internet.
If you're concerned about download time, bandwidth, money and compilation
time, why don't you just use binary packages then? Emacs is needed for
building only, and it won't fill your disk if you install from binary
NetBSD - Better for your uptime than Viagra