[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: erroneous byte-compilation during build process?
From: |
Stephen Berman |
Subject: |
Re: erroneous byte-compilation during build process? |
Date: |
Tue, 02 May 2006 23:56:40 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
On Tue, 2 May 2006 12:46:47 -0700 (PDT) "Stuart D. Herring"
<address@hidden> wrote:
>> The two recentf.elc files -- the one made by the build process and
>> the one I byte-compiled from source -- differ in almost every line,
>> as shown by diff -a, but I don't know what the differences mean: as
>> far as I can tell, they only differ in cons cells like this:
>>
>> 19c19
>> < (defvar recentf-list nil (#$ . 677))
>> ---
>> > (defvar recentf-list nil (#$ . 671))
>
> If these are the only changes, they're entirely irrelevant; the numbers
> just indicate the places in the file where the documentation can be found.
> The difference is probably a difference in the length of the file name
> given in the comment block at the top. Check for other differences, or
> make the file/path names the same length for testing.
Thanks for the pointer. Now the diff -a output is much smaller, and
it was easy to spot the differences; in fact, the very first diff of
byte-compiled functions is the function where the error arises:
2c2
< ;;; Compiled by address@hidden on Sun Apr 16 17:30:57 2006
---
> ;;; Compiled by address@hidden on Tue May 2 23:06:58 2006
426c426
< (defalias 'recentf-open-files #[(&optional files buffer-name) "\204\f
\204\f \306\307!\210r\310\n\206 \311\312\"!q\210\313\314
address@hidden"\210\315\316\fA\"\210\317 \210*\320
\210\321\322.\203<