Jim Meyering wrote (on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 at 17:01 -0800):
> However, I don't see how "-f batch-byte-compile" can be used when
> the .elc file must be created in a directory separate from the one
> containing the .el file.
I meant, instead of reinventing the wheel with this part:
--eval
The obsolete bytecomp feature is back as of Emacs 9964db4.
BTW, why doesn't lisp.am use the standard "-f batch-byte-compile"
method of producing .elc files?
Your two issues that affected only automake illustrate that the way
automake generates .elc files is different to the vast majority of
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Remember: this arises only in a non-srcdir build. That means build
> artifacts end up being written into the mostly-empty current directory
> hierarchy, which does not have copies of the sources. Installation
> processes will continue to copy both .el and .elc files into
Jim Meyering wrote:
> 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 general, Emacs expects .el and .elc to be found in the same
It seems you sent this bug report to bug-automake by bcc.
This confuses debbugs.gnu.org, which has no idea which package the
report should be associated with. Hence your message ended up on the
help-debbugs mailing list. I have assigned your report to automake, so
that this message and any future
Hi,
You change this by going to the administrative interface in mailman
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/admin/automake
Then in the General Options page, edit the introductory description
section and then press submit. Changes should be instantaneous.
However, my biggest concern is that right now, I filter both
autoconf and automake messages into the same mail folder, but
debbugs anonymizes which list a bug is being reported against
(that is, the To: is rewritten as ###@debbugs.gnu.org, so there is
no longer any mention of 'automake'
Glenn Morris wrote (on Mon, 21 Feb 2011 at 16:08 -0500):
Maybe you could turn on the Mailman subject_prefix option for your
lists?
Actually, that might interfere with how debbugs recognizes replies to
existing bug reports that get sent to eg bug-automake rather than
###@debbugs. It might
Ralf Wildenhues wrote (on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 at 22:02 +0100):
Here's a Debian PR with discussion, and a patch and description:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=34071#62
Does that help any (haven't looked closely)?
No, that is the initial implementation of the feature that we
Ralf Wildenhues wrote (on Sun, 13 Feb 2011 at 19:01 +0100):
I glanced over the debbugs documentation at debbugs.gnu.org now, but
couldn't find a place that said something about subscribing to
individual bugs. Glen, do you happen to know more about this?
I know that it doesn't work, and
Actually, that was probably too glib a response. The version number
information is probably used in other places, and needs to be sortable
so that the fixed/found commands can work. So I don't think arbitrary
version strings can work. You could use the date of a commit perhaps.
Ralf Wildenhues wrote (on Mon, 8 Nov 2010 at 22:46 +0100):
BTW, Ouch! I see that my previous reply presenting the patch
has erroneously opended a new, spurious bug report (#7345) in
the tracker! Ralf, could you please you close that report as
invalid?
Not sure how that happened,
1) Change the automake maintainer to bug-automake
2) Activate a router rule for bug-automake, that would redirect
messages to debbugs.gnu.org. This should happen automatically once I
add an entry to the appropriate config file on debbugs.gnu.org (has not
been tested yet, but should
1) Change the automake maintainer to bug-automake
2) Activate a router rule for bug-automake, that would redirect
messages to debbugs.gnu.org. This should happen automatically once I
add an entry to the appropriate config file on debbugs.gnu.org (has not
been tested yet, but should
Hi,
Ralf Wildenhues wrote (on Wed, 13 Oct 2010 at 22:46 +0200):
Thank you for this writeup, also for the other documentation accessible
from the toplevel and http://debbugs.gnu.org/Developer.html.
Most of that is generic Debbugs documentation, by the way.
There is one question I haven't
Hi,
With that in mind, I'm looking for something that can keep things in
order in some way, be that things added by users or ourselves.
Who do we talk to if we want to try it out?
Glenn Morris is the guy. He set up the emacs one and then made it so
that with almost no work we could
16 matches
Mail list logo
