JV> Kyle Jones <kyle_jones(a)wonderworks.com&gt; writes: JV> Note that the dependency is NOT a problem. The make files can JV> handle that. The problem is that the package build process JV> thinks it is sufficient to have the .el files in place. For JV> that reason I would love to get rid of the VM special build JV> case anyway. You mean the dependency is on the existence of the _directory_ I suppose, not on the .el files themselves. I think that's bogus; I don't see any reason why a package's build process should not produce arbitrarily complex .els or .elcs. That's what Lisp is _for_, isn't it? If we want a standard way of recognizing whether a package is in a state which is usable for building other packages, we should create a flag for that, an empty file named xemacs-package-stamp or such. -- University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091 _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ What are those straight lines for? "XEmacs rules."