bug#32893: describe-variable doesn't metion what lisp file created the variable

bug#32893: describe-variable doesn't metion what lisp file created the variable

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

describe-function mentions the lisp file where a function was created,
but describe-variable doesn't mention what lisp file a variable was created.

bug#32893: describe-variable doesn't metion what lisp file created the variable

[Noam Postavsky]

tags 32893 + moreinfo unreproducible
quit

積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org> writes:

> describe-function mentions the lisp file where a function was created,
> but describe-variable doesn't mention what lisp file a variable was created.

Huh?  <f1> v abbrev-file-name RET:

abbrev-file-name is a variable defined in ‘abbrev.el’.
                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

bug#32893: describe-variable doesn't metion what lisp file created the variable

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

I get:

abbrev-file-name’s value is "~/.emacs.d/abbrev_defs"

Documentation:
Default name of file from which to read abbrevs.

You can customize this variable.

[back]

emacs-version is a variable defined in ‘C source code’.
Its value is "25.2.2"

Hmmm, at least that last one worked, here on Debian.

bug#32893: describe-variable doesn't metion what lisp file created the variable

[Noam Postavsky]

On Mon, 1 Oct 2018 at 09:08, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org> wrote:
>
> I get:
>
> abbrev-file-name’s value is "~/.emacs.d/abbrev_defs"

Does it happen like this from 'emacs -Q'?

bug#32893: describe-variable doesn't metion what lisp file created the variable

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson
> 	<jidanni@jidanni.org>
> Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2018 21:08:20 +0800
> Cc: 32893@debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> I get:
> 
> abbrev-file-name’s value is "~/.emacs.d/abbrev_defs"
> 
> Documentation:
> Default name of file from which to read abbrevs.
> 
> You can customize this variable.
> 
> [back]
> 
> emacs-version is a variable defined in ‘C source code’.
> Its value is "25.2.2"
> 
> Hmmm, at least that last one worked, here on Debian.

Maybe you should report this to Debian, because my Emacs 25.2 does
show the file where abbrev-file-name is defined.

bug#32893: describe-variable doesn't metion what lisp file created the variable

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

>>>>> "NP" == Noam Postavsky <npostavs@gmail.com> writes:

NP> Does it happen like this from 'emacs -Q'?

Yes. Still bad.

OK I submitted https://bugs.debian.org/910021 .

bug#32893: Let him know source code is available

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

B> most likely caused by missing recommended package emacs-el.

Dear bug-gnu-emacs, I got an idea for 32893@debbugs.gnu.org:
Show the same thing no matter if the user has the .els installed or not.
And when he clicks on it have a message: "Source code not available
because you don't have the .els installed."

Or next to the link have "(source code not installed)" etc. next to the
link so he knows before he clicks it.

Currently he has no clue that source code is actually available,
thus defeating the whole Free Software Movement!

bug#32893: Let him know source code is available

[Glenn Morris]

積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote:

> B> most likely caused by missing recommended package emacs-el.
>
> Dear bug-gnu-emacs, I got an idea for 32893@debbugs.gnu.org:
> Show the same thing no matter if the user has the .els installed or not.

Emacs does not support installing without its .el files and makes no
provision for it. It's something downstream distributions added back
when disk space was an issue (I guess?). They get to keep all the pieces
from the resulting breakage. :)
Personally I think it should this separation should just go away.

bug#32893: Let him know source code is available

[Glenn Morris]

PS Red Hat got rid of this split years ago, and I would encourage Debian
to follow suit; ref https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1151652

bug#32893: GNU wishes Debian not split out .els anymore

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

reopen 910021
retitle 910021 GNU wishes Debian not split out .els anymore
thanks

>>>>> "GM" == Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> writes:

GM> Emacs does not support installing without its .el files and makes no
GM> provision for it. It's something downstream distributions added back
GM> when disk space was an issue (I guess?). They get to keep all the pieces
GM> from the resulting breakage. :)
GM> Personally I think it should this separation should just go away.

GM> PS Red Hat got rid of this split years ago, and I would encourage Debian
GM> to follow suit; ref https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1151652