Re: compiling option for nomule
Hrvoje Niksic writes:
Uwe Brauer <oub(a)mat.ucm.es> writes:
[snip]
Those should really be only two, because no option is equivalent to
"with-mule=no". (Unless the default has changed to "yes", which I
doubt.)
[snip]
It sounds like in one case you get the "file coding"
feature, whereas
in the other case you don't. I'm not sure why that would be the case.
The question is, are the binaries different in these two cases.
I had very bad experience with mule, especially in connection with the
x-symbol-package: the coding got complete screwed up. This is why I
really want a mule free xemacs.
If it would be only semi-free I would like to know.
Now in the official debian packages the mule free xemacs is compiled
without any option and therefore it seems the "file coding" feature is
included.
I think it is of general interest to know what the mulefree version
with the "file coding" feature contains.