[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: still failing to "make" almost-cvs 21.3

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: still failing to "make" almost-cvs 21.3
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 13:40:31 +0200

> From: address@hidden (David Combs)
> Newsgroups:
> Date: 16 Jul 2004 21:08:07 -0400
> STILL trying to compile "almost-cvs" 21.3

This is the wrong place to discuss problems with building the CVS
code.  Please in the future write to address@hidden

> ------- Repeating that code that caught me:
> maybe_bootstrap:
>       @bar="`echo $(srcdir)/lisp/*.elc`"; \
>       if [ \( "$$bar" = '$(srcdir)/lisp/*.elc' \) -o \( "$$bar" = '' \) ]; 
> then \
>         echo "Your tree does not include the compiled Lisp files."; \
>         echo "You need to do \`make bootstrap' to build Emacs."; \
>         echo "Emacs now requires Texinfo version 4.2."; \
>         exit 1;\
>       fi

That's right: the first time you build the CVS code after checking it
out, you need to say "make bootstrap".

> I've now gone and installed texinfo 4.2, and it's on $PATH.
> No, no .elc-files.  Why didn't they get built?  Beats me!

They are not in the CVS tree, and since your previous bootstrap
failed, they were not built.

> And, as instructed, I tried to do the "make bootstrap"; got this:
> 275 ==/big7.1/sources-stuff-2/emacs-21.3==> 
> 275 ==/big7.1/sources-stuff-2/emacs-21.3==> make bootstrap
> (cd src;      make  mostlyclean)
> [Please ignore a syntax error on the next line - it is intentional]

Where did that message come from?  The only place I can find it in the
CVS is in the nt/gmake.defs file, which should be only used on
Windows.  Are you building this on Windows?  If so, you need to follow
the Windows installation instructions in nt/INSTALL, except that you
should say "make bootstrap" instead of just "make".

> Huh?:  "make[1]: *** No rule to make target `mostlyclean'.  Stop."

Probably because you didn't run nt/configure.bat, and so there's no
Makefile in the `src' directory.

> Hey, cvs-maintainers, do I *really* have to hack this Makefile,

No, you don't.

>   fix bugs in it?

What bugs? ;-)

reply via email to

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