[COMMIT] Eliminate some non-X11 build failures

[Aidan Kehoe]

 Ar an séú lá déag de mí Deireadh Fómhair, scríobh Aidan Kehoe: 

 >  Ar an cúigiú lá déag de mí Deireadh Fómhair, scríobh Stephen J. Turnbull: 
 > 
 >  > [...] In fact, I don't see a point to doing multiple test builds for
 >  > different builds of XEmacs of a given version at all. I'm not an expert
 >  > on the byte- compiler, but AFAIK in the absence of compilation
 >  > conditioned on features there should be no differences between a package
 >  > byte-compiled by an X11 build and one byte-compiled by a non-X11 build of
 >  > XEmacs.
 > 
 > It’s quite easy to have a compile-time dependency on X11 if; you just need
 > top-level code in one file that calls an X11-specific function, together
 > with a #'require of that file from another file (since #'require calls are
 > surrounded by an implicit #'eval-and-compile). x-symbol fails on a non-X11
 > build for a similar reason right now, though my memory of the details isn’t
 > particularly clear and I haven’t sshed to my home machine to check if that’s
 > exactly it.
 > 
 > More generally, there’s no guarantee that X11 will always be XEmacs’ primary
 > platform, and not requiring it would make it easier to implement smoketests
 > for failures on Win32 and Carbon.

But, Mike, as I said, no-one’s holding themselves to that right now, and
while an occasional check on a non-X11 build would be nice, don’t feel
yourself obliged to do it.

-- 
On the quay of the little Black Sea port, where the rescued pair came once
more into contact with civilization, Dobrinton was bitten by a dog which was
assumed to be mad, though it may only have been indiscriminating. (Saki)