From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#48117: 28.0.50; Update of loaddefs.el during normal build is unreliable Date: Sat, 01 May 2021 09:20:51 +0000 Message-ID: <4edb143526eb913b641f@heytings.org> References: <8335v8c7o0.fsf@gnu.org> <83lf8zbyr8.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6pfbw3s.fsf@gnu.org> <83tunna9dt.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1ira8rs.fsf@gnu.org> <4edb1435266f8ca80b73@heytings.org> <83fsz6amij.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35456"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rgm@gnu.org, 48117@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat May 01 11:21:25 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lcloT-00098X-90 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 11:21:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40482 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcloS-0004vn-DH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 05:21:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46952) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lclo8-0004hL-4V for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 05:21:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48725) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lclo7-0007wo-TU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 05:21:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lclo7-0002ae-NP for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 05:21:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Gregory Heytings Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 01 May 2021 09:21:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 48117 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 48117-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B48117.16198608579836 (code B ref 48117); Sat, 01 May 2021 09:21:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at 48117) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 May 2021 09:20:57 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60271 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lclnz-0002YP-RP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 05:20:56 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:60870) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lclnx-0002XX-1Q for 48117@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 05:20:54 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1619860851; bh=tkgcjXU4ofL6xgPxhDlmC34bnwU/fA5mq2193mrRiVo=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=c2kYd9cWt4Z3LrBaj2wtnNTvgFcwcwUhia2/MmOpyHN7ugS1/fJMt1uwKr80AHFG9 SdZecgcaKPVQr3JXfC/MAdnkLF1TNI+S6p7YrSb0WR8kcvcbUH4ZiXaie1+Jgwknda za5eNkh/uweqH082Ci76qOmsuxUsGAjWuwIyS4tUIdK0IvNumKZ2UV6F3XCx7pYAdH urn+HzDVcEYY3eo68g+4JSBykcoURxjBEM1GIDNaAfDrux9YeX4TbjjIUFPCTjNN3a ycuDPkMeI9O/qO3qH/PvWLXy79pQV0e7KyqW7tCASk2nA3zVw3eQQU5cEifry0blll O8BBdyGxFrNrw== In-Reply-To: <83fsz6amij.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:205327 Archived-At: >> You suggested copying ldefs-boot.el onto loaddefs.el when it is more >> recent. I'm not entirely sure, but it seems to me that forcing a >> regeneration of the loaddefs files during make whenever ldefs-boot.el >> is more recent than loaddefs.el would be a better solution. > > Your proposal would produce marginally better results for a > significantly longer build time, so I don't think it's a net win. > If ldefs-boot.el is updated, say, once a week, this would force the regeneration of the loaddefs files at most once a week. Wouldn't that be a reasonable compromise? On my computer, regenerating the loaddefs files takes about 10 seconds, or ~3% of the time of a make bootstrap.