[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] port elisp-compilation support to emacs-23.1 and newer

From: Jim Meyering
Subject: Re: [PATCH] port elisp-compilation support to emacs-23.1 and newer
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 22:51:45 -0800

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Mathieu Lirzin <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello Jim,
> Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> I wanted to make a new idutils release, but was blocked because
>>> its "make distcheck" would fail. That was because it distributes
>>> and builds from an elisp file, and automake's elisp-compilation
>>> rule uses a function that was marked obsolete back in 2009.
>>> Upstream Emacs finally removed support for that function in May,
>>> so anyone using emacs built since then will see the same failure
>>> I saw. It also strikes whenever building from a read-only source
>>> directory.
>>> This change switches the build command to use the "new" way.
>>> I started discussion on emacs-devel last night:
>>> From ecad5844100d5193ecd58f66f31f6bbf0ef04e23 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Jim Meyering <address@hidden>
>>> Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 21:07:29 -0800
>>> Subject: [PATCH] port elisp-compilation support to emacs-23.1 and newer
>>> In May of 2017, support for using the long-deprecated
>>> byte-compile-dest-file function was removed, and that removal broke
>>> automake's elisp-compiling rule for any .el file not in the current
>>> directory.  In emacs-23.1 (July 2009) byte-compile-dest-file-function
>>> became the recommended way to adjust the byte-compiler's destination.
>>> * lib/am/ (.el.elc): Use byte-compile-dest-file-function,
>>> rather than byte-compile-dest-file.
>>> * t/ New file, to test for the above.
>>> * t/ (handwritten_TESTS): Add it.
>> Pushed to the micro branch:
> With the "recent" change in Automake branch naming scheme, 'master'
> seems a better fit for this:
> Thanks.

Hi Mathieu,
Happy to adjust. Would you prefer that I merge micro into master,
then... or something else? Then delete micro? When I noticed that I'd
created that branch (after reading the description in HACKING), I
figured I'd missed something.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]