Emacs 23.2.91 pretest

Emacs 23.2.91 pretest

[Chong Yidong]

Emacs pretest 23.2.91 is now available for download via FTP, at the
following location:

  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-23.2.91.tar.gz

This is the second pretest for what will become Emacs 23.3, which is
mostly a bugfix release.  The xdelta against 23.2.90 is at

  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-23.2.90-23.2.91.xdelta

Please send me an email reporting success or failure on your build
platform.  Report bugs via M-x report-emacs-bugs, or email
bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org.  For questions, email emacs-devel@gnu.org.

Thank you for helping test Emacs.

Re: Emacs 23.2.91 pretest

[Andreas Schwab]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

> Emacs pretest 23.2.91 is now available for download via FTP, at the
> following location:
>
>   ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-23.2.91.tar.gz

The etc/*.pyc files are not supposed to be part of the tarball.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

Re: Emacs 23.2.91 pretest

[Glenn Morris]

Andreas Schwab wrote:

> The etc/*.pyc files are not supposed to be part of the tarball.

I updated make-dist.

Re: Emacs 23.2.91 pretest

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 21:32:37 -0500
> Cc: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> Andreas Schwab wrote:
> 
> > The etc/*.pyc files are not supposed to be part of the tarball.
> 
> I updated make-dist.

Are these files supposed to be compiled at all?  If so, when and by
what magic?

If they aren't supposed to be compiled, how did the *.pyc files end up
there?

Re: Emacs 23.2.91 pretest

[Neal Becker]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
>> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 21:32:37 -0500
>> Cc: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> 
>> Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> 
>> > The etc/*.pyc files are not supposed to be part of the tarball.
>> 
>> I updated make-dist.
> 
> Are these files supposed to be compiled at all?  If so, when and by
> what magic?
> 
> If they aren't supposed to be compiled, how did the *.pyc files end up
> there?

Most linux distributions already have a mechanism to compile the files
after they are installed.

Re: Emacs 23.2.91 pretest (windows binaries)

[Sean Sieger]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

    Emacs pretest 23.2.91 is now available for download via FTP, at the
    following location:

      ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-23.2.91.tar.gz

    This is the second pretest for what will become Emacs 23.3, which is
    mostly a bugfix release.  The xdelta against 23.2.90 is at

      ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-23.2.90-23.2.91.xdelta

    Please send me an email reporting success or failure on your build
    platform.  Report bugs via M-x report-emacs-bugs, or email
    bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org.  For questions, email emacs-devel@gnu.org.

    Thank you for helping test Emacs.

The pretest was built and runs successfully on Windows.  Binaries have
been published in

http://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/windows/

Re: Emacs 23.2.91 pretest

[Glenn Morris]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> Are these files supposed to be compiled at all?

Not by any process in the Emacs Makefiles, AFAIK.

> If they aren't supposed to be compiled, how did the *.pyc files end up
> there?

I've always assumed that Python may "helpfully" compile them on the
fly the first time they happen to be loaded. I checked, and yes:

rm etc/*.pyc
./src/emacs -Q -f run-python
ls -l etc/*.pyc

Re: Emacs 23.2.91 pretest

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Glenn Morris writes:
 > Eli Zaretskii wrote:
 > 
 > > Are these files supposed to be compiled at all?
 > 
 > Not by any process in the Emacs Makefiles, AFAIK.
 > 
 > > If they aren't supposed to be compiled, how did the *.pyc files end up
 > > there?
 > 
 > I've always assumed that Python may "helpfully" compile them on the
 > fly the first time they happen to be loaded.

Python doesn't provide a Python interpreter in the sense that Emacs
provides a Lisp interpreter.  Python always runs as bytecode.  If the
directory where the .py file lives is writable and the user doesn't
explicitly specify otherwise, the compiled object is written to disk
as a .pyc or .pyo ("optimized", which basically means no assert code
is compiled).