Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files

[Alex Kost]

Ludovic Courtès (2016-05-19 15:56 +0300) wrote:

>> From ca571f7631bf77ddc8ad6257fe165b4ff0ef5e6b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Alex Kost <address@hidden>
>> Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 11:01:40 +0300
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: emacs: Remove *.elc from the release tarball.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/emacs.scm (emacs)[arguments]: Add 'remove-compiled-elisp'
>>   phase.
>> ---
>>  gnu/packages/emacs.scm | 9 +++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/gnu/packages/emacs.scm b/gnu/packages/emacs.scm
>> index 32ed722..0c15f63 100644
>> --- a/gnu/packages/emacs.scm
>> +++ b/gnu/packages/emacs.scm
>> @@ -91,6 +91,15 @@
>>               (substitute* (find-files "." "^Makefile\\.in$")
>>                 (("/bin/pwd")
>>                  "pwd"))))
>> +         (add-after 'configure 'remove-compiled-elisp
>> +           (lambda _
>> +             ;; Emacs comes with compiled elisp (*.elc) and generated
>> +             ;; autoloads (*loaddefs.el) files.  This does not allow us to 
>> use
>> +             ;; "emacs-source-date-epoch.patch" effectively, so remove these
>> +             ;; files (using 'make bootstrap-clean'), as 'make' will 
>> recreate
>> +             ;; them.
>> +             (with-directory-excursion "lisp"
>> +               (zero? (system* "make" "bootstrap-clean")))))
>
> I would rather do it in a ‘snippet’ so that ‘guix build -S emacs’
> returns the cleaned-up source.

Hm, I didn't think about it; yeah, I agree it would be better, thanks!

> However, the snippet would have to duplicate the logic of this makefile
> rule, which might not be desirable (depends on how complex this rule
> is).  If you think it’s best to keep this way, please push!

The rule is rather simple, it just removes all compiled and generated
files, so attached is the version with snippet.

0001-gnu-emacs-Remove-.elc-and-autoloads-from-the-tarball.patch
Description: Text Data