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 12:29:12 +0000 Message-ID: <4edb143526f99ac92176@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> <4edb143526eb913b641f@heytings.org> <837dkiajbd.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="34932"; 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 14:31:02 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 1lcolx-0008xe-PQ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 14:31:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36442 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcolw-000218-To for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 08:31:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48578) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcol0-00020O-No for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 08:30:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:53033) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcol0-0005L3-CS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 08:30:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lcol0-000528-8J for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 08:30:02 -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 12:30:02 +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=B48117.161987215419320 (code B ref 48117); Sat, 01 May 2021 12:30:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 48117) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 May 2021 12:29:14 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36346 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lcokD-00051Y-UK for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 08:29:14 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:32836) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lcokD-00051S-7v for 48117@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 08:29:13 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1619872152; bh=iqS0QHwAYeguvcsSGVCGIZBArykjI0HgTP+iPFzB8e0=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=CSENOYPlQp5yR0tvn8dHSI956JNRLCb/r+/HUX0OYMjRibSCtfx24L8jBkMCDsKtw 8aSrH5A4CCPBvi11knNErk4abVJSy1eBxptGmJzBrBrjfOQLmpONiBUUg5bwR6xFFk EqcKyyUWcbIdfWsw2QsPTSMuzEiRRDo4sPPgR04/S4hJvfd2tELk2clnnMUQ4sy8zP mZIVOlcMIAuy/gIaYNggQMfzzY8RSGiF0k5OEKsBlkWPlSnREShCXi3KuIsrqDT/rN p1oIrg099Q2gCDg2kJJPTJ78aNA+XgFbj5vbMwr38RG19sUEOnkT6F8KBZtS4U6xpr OL6JYKOoy+zGQ== In-Reply-To: <837dkiajbd.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:205343 Archived-At: >>> 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? > > Compromise between which alternatives? > I see at least the following possible alternatives: - the current situation, which you describe in your original post, in which the loaddefs files need to be regenerated manually (inconvenient) - regenerating the loaddefs files for each make invocation (inefficient) - copying the ldefs-boot.el onto loaddefs.el when it is more recent (which IIUC could lose local additions to loaddefs.el) - automatically regenerating the loaddefs files when ldefs-boot.el is more recent than loaddefs.el (which I understand could be a bit slow) - issue only a warning when make is invoked and ldefs-boot.el is more recent than loaddefs.el (and perhaps add a autoloads or loaddefs target to the main Makefile)