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: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 19:08:48 +0000 Message-ID: References: <8335v8c7o0.fsf@gnu.org> <83lf8zbyr8.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6pfbw3s.fsf@gnu.org> <83tunna9dt.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="22623"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 48117@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 30 21:09:10 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 1lcYVh-0005le-IF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 21:09:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49978 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcYVg-0004Pa-Kq for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 15:09:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34116) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcYVa-0004PS-FA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 15:09:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48298) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcYVa-00022i-7y for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 15:09:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lcYVa-0007wu-2z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 15:09:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Gregory Heytings Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 19:09:02 +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=B48117.161980973230539 (code B ref 48117); Fri, 30 Apr 2021 19:09:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 48117) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Apr 2021 19:08:52 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59844 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lcYVQ-0007wV-C5 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 15:08:52 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:59990) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lcYVO-0007wL-9l for 48117@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 15:08:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1619809729; bh=pWVepf8eBHIVfqtni+7xLTlfFwVmeajp4g0VmWzYXaE=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=oh5dCCHNi+Rm0JcAbDTJb+x+a5L907YeP7+yFZmOVT2OKrkzGuJAnkjAWGocG22v4 CNNxvXtzorD5qZDZPG57boj5N6jXND2fnkifEof9QItbEuISTbrrMbVSaJrz/t2QEW yOx/NrJQmy6i0ok+vyaP8Y6rAA3u4Z/RWcqKiXGez0zXOXEVsTeLG7mNRrTau31/ge a6YeLXHby5xqRkUjDvEFSBu/ZtvE2xsjyiZEiRm2FLhtocim2Fp7FGSmiCim2BCak9 GJ8c37q9Z5lRWUdYaMPDYOGrI2+X3LEEDsDLFu8m5jVzL28jDmAZRfeRyqRac6nuhG 8VGdH5r4POdVQ== In-Reply-To: <83tunna9dt.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:205297 Archived-At: >> Can ldefs-boot.el not be used to detect whether loaddefs.el needs to be >> regenerated? > > I believe that's what Glenn suggested a few minutes ago. > Yes, it's more or less the same idea, our mails crossed each other because of the lists.gnu.org delivery time. Note that, as I said, this won't work without keeping ldefs-boot.el up to date.