[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Building a tarball with native-compilation support
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Building a tarball with native-compilation support |
Date: |
Fri, 06 Aug 2021 10:37:10 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> Yes, there are valid reasons to have the *.elc files in the tarball:
>
> . They make the build faster, because the step of using only *.el
> for COMPILE_FIRST is avoided;
> . They are a must if the user wants Emacs without native-compilation
> support, and in that case make the build extremely fast;
> . They provide canonical *.elc files produce on a system where most
> of the *.el files can be meaningfully byte-compiled because the
> related functionality is supported.
Interesting. The second point is the one I remembered (it does make
a very substantial difference, indeed). I'm not sure what the first
point means, really (it seems to be just a subset of the second point).
The third point is new to me: which .el files can't be meaningfully
bytecompiled on all systems?
Stefan
- Building a tarball with native-compilation support, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/08/05
- Re: Building a tarball with native-compilation support, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/08/07
- Re: Building a tarball with native-compilation support, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/08/07
- Re: Building a tarball with native-compilation support, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/08/07
- Re: Building a tarball with native-compilation support, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/08/14
- Re: Building a tarball with native-compilation support, Andrea Corallo, 2021/08/17
- Re: Building a tarball with native-compilation support, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/08/17
- Re: Building a tarball with native-compilation support, Andrea Corallo, 2021/08/17