> It would strange and unfriendly indeed if an "install" following a "build"
> deleted the binaries that were just built.  "install" isn't useful without
> "-u", because if you'd wanted to build and install in one step, you would
> have used "build". That argument doesn't apply to any of the other targets.

Now that I think about it, yes, it makes sense that one would expect 
an install target to not nuke things, and yet one very well might do a 
release target from scratch.

I guess I was just thinking that "finishing" targets should behave 
similarly. Maybe if the help message that comes up when one calls build.sh 
without options said (implies -u) for install, it'd be clearer that it's 
sepcial.

Thanks,
John