From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#36828: 27.0.50; Uninstalled emacs shows installed documentation Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 00:50:11 +0100 Message-ID: <87mudlkato.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <87lfwitcyf.fsf@telefonica.net> <875znkrj6y.fsf@gmail.com> <83mugwkh8u.fsf@gnu.org> <871ry8rfge.fsf@gmail.com> <83k1c0kcbw.fsf@gnu.org> <87wog0pwg6.fsf@gmail.com> <83ftmok8tt.fsf@gnu.org> <874l34smwx.fsf@telefonica.net> <83blxck5gf.fsf@gnu.org> <87v9vkr1je.fsf@telefonica.net> <83wofzimq8.fsf@gnu.org> <87eez0kxhq.fsf@telefonica.net> <83v9sbvqhl.fsf@gnu.org> <874kzvlo0w.fsf@telefonica.net> <838sp7vgfl.fsf@gnu.org> <87zhhnk57f.fsf@telefonica.net> <83y2x7tyb1.fsf@gnu.org> <87v9sbjms0.fsf@telefonica.net> <83d0ejtfzu.fsf@gnu.org> <87r22zjl44.fsf@telefonica.net> <835zkau5y6.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="84549"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 36828@debbugs.gnu.org, stepnem@gmail.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 28 00:51:16 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iOsJY-000Lsk-HP for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 00:51:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49986 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iOsJW-0005m4-Kx for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 19:51:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38512) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iOsJN-0005ZB-Ul for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 19:51:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iOsJM-0008Uo-L2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 19:51:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:34836) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iOsJK-0008Tk-5y for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 19:51:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iOsJK-0007vc-04 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 19:51:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2019 23:51:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 36828 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 36828-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B36828.157222022330411 (code B ref 36828); Sun, 27 Oct 2019 23:51:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 36828) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2019 23:50:23 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43654 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iOsIh-0007uR-2q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 19:50:23 -0400 Original-Received: from relayout03-redir.e.movistar.es ([86.109.101.203]:37989) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iOsId-0007u9-Fc for 36828@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 19:50:20 -0400 Original-Received: from sky (238.red-79-144-110.dynamicip.rima-tde.net [79.144.110.238]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: 981711563@telefonica.net) by relayout03.e.movistar.es (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 471ZN425yYzMlRd; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 00:50:12 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <835zkau5y6.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2019 07:13:05 +0200") X-CTCH-Score: 0.000 X-CTCH-ScoreCust: 0.000 X-TnetOut-Country: IP: 79.144.110.238 | Country: ES X-TnetOut-Information: AntiSPAM and AntiVIRUS on relayout03 X-TnetOut-MsgID: 471ZN425yYzMlRd.A597B X-TnetOut-SpamCheck: no es spam, Unknown X-TnetOut-From: ofv@wanadoo.es X-TnetOut-Watermark: 1572825012.97536@FFkzwkYns4V+zrDSaxl9dg X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:170280 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > I prefer not to consider such radical changes in this logic, because > we've been using what's there now for ages. Who knows how many > legitimate use cases this could potentially break? Your use case is > quite specialized: having an older binary of the exact same version > installed is unusual, IME. So radical changes due to this use case > are unjustified, IMO. > > Let's try to find a way of detecting your situation without making too > many waves elsewhere, okay? Once we know that we are running a non-installed emacs, detecting that it is an out-of-source build seems quite easy, because the build directory contains build artifacts without the sources. Checking for the presence of Makefile and the absence of Makefile.in, for instance, should be enough. Said that, I'll like to clarify that this is nothing about me. This issue caught me by surprise once and, now that I know about it, it is not a problem anymore. In fact, because your past comments about its small relevance I closed the bug and it was reopened by other participant who thinks (as I do) that the use case is not as rare as you think. The difference between that other participant and me seems to be that I don't consider this issue worth of arguing about. If you close it as wontfix, I'm fine. If you think it is worth fixing, I'll try to provide an acceptable patch.