From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: jidanni@jidanni.org Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: bug#5361: .elcs should tell more about the .els they were compiled from Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 02:29:27 +0800 Message-ID: <874omslcl4.fsf@jidanni.org> Reply-To: jidanni@jidanni.org, 5361@debbugs.gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1263259206 20097 80.91.229.12 (12 Jan 2010 01:20:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:20:06 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 12 02:19:59 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NUVQM-0001wN-Q8 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 02:19:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33825 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NUVQN-0003b5-AG for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:19:59 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NUVQ3-0003Vs-1d for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:19:39 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NUVPw-0003U5-05 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:19:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35820 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NUVPv-0003U2-Sb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:19:31 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:51254) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NUVPv-0004Gf-Ik for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:19:31 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NUVEp-0007Pb-9t; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:08:03 -0500 X-Loop: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Mail-Followup-To: jidanni@jidanni.org, 5361@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-From: jidanni@jidanni.org Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:08:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Emacs-PR-Message: report 5361 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.126325848228465 (code B ref -1); Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:08:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jan 2010 01:08:02 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NUVEl-0007P1-Pp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:08:00 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NUVEj-0007Oi-Le for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:07:58 -0500 Original-Received: from mx10.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]:54407) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NUVEg-0008O0-2O for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:07:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NUVEf-0001dC-Ha for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:07:53 -0500 Original-Received: from caiajhbdccah.dreamhost.com ([208.97.132.207]:46576 helo=homiemail-a2.g.dreamhost.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NUVEf-0001co-5L for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:07:53 -0500 Original-Received: from jidanni.org (218-163-6-10.dynamic.hinet.net [218.163.6.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by homiemail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93656D26E6 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:07:51 -0800 (PST) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Spam-Score: -4.8 (----) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -4.8 (----) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:08:03 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:34208 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:25378 Archived-At: Let's try to compare two .elc files to see if they are different. $ diff -a *.elc 2,4c2,4 < ;;; Compiled by jidanni@jidanni1.jidanni.org on Sat Jul 25 03:33:07 2009 < ;;; from file /home/jidanni/tmp/emacs-w3m/w3m-dtree.el < ;;; in Emacs version 23.0.96.1 --- > ;;; Compiled by root@jidanni1.jidanni.org on Thu Jan 7 04:59:34 2010 > ;;; from file /usr/share/emacs-snapshot/site-lisp/w3m/w3m-dtree.el > ;;; in Emacs version 23.1.91.1 ... Well, what would really help is if along with mentioning which .el file the .elc file was compiled from, would be adding checksum and some ls -l information about the .el file. Else it is really hard figuring out if the .elcs are really derived from the .els currently nearby. (And no, nobody wants to compile again just to see.)