[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Emacs 29.3 released

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Emacs 29.3 released
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:46:03 +0200

> From: Corwin Brust <corwin@bru.st>
> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:36:08 -0500
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > I have no idea.  Comparing the configure script for Emacs 29.2 and
> > Emacs 29.3 doesn't show any differences, and neither does comparing
> > the various Makefile's.
> >
> > If you build Emacs 29.2 in this manner, do you get all the *.el files
> > compiled into *.eln, or do you see the same problem with Emacs 29.2?
> No, Building 29.2 from the release tarball (so, without running
> autogen.sh) successfully precompiles all the ELNs as expected.

Strange.  I don't see this problem.

> > One note, though: if you say --with-native-compilation=aot, you don't
> > need the NATIVE_FULL_AOT=1 part.  Not sure if this is relevant or not.
> >
> A good point.  I haven't tried removing this to see if anything
> changes; 29.2 works properly, so I suspect this is a read herring but
> I'll try removing it, nevertheless.
> I do get all full AOT build if I add ./autogen.sh to the start of my
> recipe -- which is really weird.  I find no differences between the
> configure script provided with emacs-29.3 tarball and the one created
> by running autogen.sh against the unpacked release tarball sources.  I
> have no idea why AOT is working in the latter case but not the first.

FWIW, I've just built the 29.3 release tarball with the
"--with-native-compilation=aot" option (and without
NATIVE_FULL_AOT=1), and it builds all the *.eln files just fine.  I
didn't need to run autogen.sh.

> I'm inclined to go ahead and publish using the version where I run
> autogen.sh -- let me know if we prefer  that we track this issue down
> first, instead.

I don't think autogen.sh can do any harm, but I cannot be sure without
understanding why you see this weird problem.

reply via email to

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