[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Need help with upstream vs Debian emacs-23.4 build differences

From: Svante Signell
Subject: Re: Need help with upstream vs Debian emacs-23.4 build differences
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 23:10:28 +0200

On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 20:44 -0400, Glenn Morris wrote:
> Dropping help-gnu-emacs since there is no point discussing this on two
> lists.
> Svante Signell wrote:
> > Is cpp used to process the Makefiles, if so where to find it?
> In 23.4, yes. Where to find cpp? I don't understand the question...

My question should be read: Where in the build log can I find where cpp
modifies the Makefile?

> The latest release is 24.1, which does not use cpp. I would encourage
> you to try that and not worry about 23.4.
> http://packages.qa.debian.org/e/emacs24.html

Yes, 24.1 builds and even the upcoming Debian version does (when
libselinux1-dev dependency is removed) :) There are still 34 packages
biuld-depending on 23.4, but that might change in due time too.

> > Another piece of information is that when replacing the dumped emacs
> > from Debian with the one from the tarball, build is OK! So it seem that
> > the differences are in temacs or the dumped emacs.
> IIUC, Debian includes several patches to the Emacs sources.
> You might start by selectively removing them.
> Also, I never understood what this means:

I have removed the debian patches one at a time. No difference. And
these patches touch other files, compared to the ones causing the
problems. The only way to get a successful build is to remove the patch 
where GNU is replaced for NEWS to find etc, and make a symlink of the
build etc/charsets directory to /usr/share/emacs/23.4/etc. (or use an
installed emacs-23.4).

> > However, on Debian the whole source tree is copied to debian/build-?
> > where ?=x,nox,lucid.
> You mean;
> tar zvxf emacs-23.4.tar.gz
> cp -pr emacs-23.4 debian/build-x
> etc 

They use cp -a, but that is the same isn't it?

> The loaddefs difference looks like it could be an Emacs bug; but it
> ought to be harmless in itself.

I think the problem lies in the loaddefs.el being regenerated by the
autoloads. My problem is that I don't know why it happens, compared to
the tarball.

reply via email to

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