pre-test windows binaries

pre-test windows binaries

[Lode Leroy]

I installed this version:
http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/emacs-25.0.92-x86_64-w64-mingw32.zip
and when clicking the "Emacs Guided Tour" in the "About GNU Emacs"
text, I get this error:
    Contacting host: www.gnu.org:80
    libxml2 library not found

could libxml2.dll be added to the zip archive?

Best regards,
-- lode

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Alan Third]

On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 03:51:42PM +0200, Lode Leroy wrote:
> I installed this version:
> http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/emacs-25.0.92-x86_64-w64-mingw32.zip
> and when clicking the "Emacs Guided Tour" in the "About GNU Emacs"
> text, I get this error:
>     Contacting host: www.gnu.org:80
>     libxml2 library not found
> 
> could libxml2.dll be added to the zip archive?

You should be able to grab lixml from here:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/ezwinports/files/

-- 
Alan Third

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 19:43:51 +0100
> From: Alan Third <alan@idiocy.org>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 03:51:42PM +0200, Lode Leroy wrote:
> > I installed this version:
> > http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/emacs-25.0.92-x86_64-w64-mingw32.zip
> > and when clicking the "Emacs Guided Tour" in the "About GNU Emacs"
> > text, I get this error:
> >     Contacting host: www.gnu.org:80
> >     libxml2 library not found
> > 
> > could libxml2.dll be added to the zip archive?
> 
> You should be able to grab lixml from here:
> 
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/ezwinports/files/

No, not for the 64-bit build of Emacs.

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Lode Leroy <lode.leroy@gmail.com> writes:

> I installed this version:
> http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/emacs-25.0.92-x86_64-w64-mingw32.zip
> and when clicking the "Emacs Guided Tour" in the "About GNU Emacs"
> text, I get this error:
>     Contacting host: www.gnu.org:80
>     libxml2 library not found
>
> could libxml2.dll be added to the zip archive?

Try installing this version instead:

http://emacsbinw64.sourceforge.net/

It comes with all the libraries you need for a fully features Emacs.
It's only up to 25.0.50, though.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Arash Esbati]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Try installing this version instead:
>
> http://emacsbinw64.sourceforge.net/
>
> It comes with all the libraries you need for a fully features Emacs.
> It's only up to 25.0.50, though.

There is also the pretest directory containing the latest and greatest
version:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/emacsbinw64/files/pretest/

Best, Arash

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Phillip Lord]

Lode Leroy <lode.leroy@gmail.com> writes:

> I installed this version:
> http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/emacs-25.0.92-x86_64-w64-mingw32.zip
> and when clicking the "Emacs Guided Tour" in the "About GNU Emacs"
> text, I get this error:
>     Contacting host: www.gnu.org:80
>     libxml2 library not found
>
> could libxml2.dll be added to the zip archive?


It could be, but the reason for not doing this is that I then have to
distribute the source for libxml2.dll. And, of course, any dependencies.
And, if libxml2, why not gnutls, libjpeg and all the others (again, with
all their source). I think it is mainly for this reason that the dlls
haven't been distributed previously with the exception of libXpm --
although Emacs can even function without this.

The only solution I know of is that, you can unpack my binaries on top
of a msys2 installation and all should work.

I find this not an ideal solution at the moment, as it makes Emacs
installation painful. I do have a better potential solution in mind:
which is to write an ELPA package which pulls all the relevant DLLs
straight down from the msys repositories. This way, we don't have to
distribute any DLLs at all, so source distribution isn't needed.

Phil

pre-test windows binaries

[Phillip Lord]

I've made binaries of the first Emacs pre-test which I believe are now
fully functional.

http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/

Never done this before. Testing and comments welcome.

Thanks to Eli and Andrew Moreton for extensive feedback on getting the
process working.

Phil

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[psachin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 524 bytes --]

Hi Philip,

Great work!. Probably you could also try version 25.0.92.*, you could get
few more things working.

On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 3:10 AM, Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk>
wrote:

>
> I've made binaries of the first Emacs pre-test which I believe are now
> fully functional.
>
> http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/
>
> Never done this before. Testing and comments welcome.
>
> Thanks to Eli and Andrew Moreton for extensive feedback on getting the
> process working.
>
> Phil
>
>


-- 
Sachin
psachin.github.io

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1219 bytes --]

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Phillip Lord]

I plan to do them all, although I won't release them all at once, in
case I mess the packaging process up -- then I can just fix the next.

Phil

psachin <iclcoolster@gmail.com> writes:
> Great work!. Probably you could also try version 25.0.92.*, you could get
> few more things working.
>
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 3:10 AM, Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I've made binaries of the first Emacs pre-test which I believe are now
>> fully functional.
>>
>> http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/
>>
>> Never done this before. Testing and comments welcome.
>>
>> Thanks to Eli and Andrew Moreton for extensive feedback on getting the
>> process working.
>>
>> Phil
>>
>>

RE: pre-test windows binaries

[Drew Adams]

> I've made binaries of the first Emacs pre-test which I believe are now
> fully functional.
> http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/
> 
> Never done this before. Testing and comments welcome.

Thanks, but please unzip the source files (e.g., in directory lisp
and its subdirs).

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Phillip Lord]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

>> I've made binaries of the first Emacs pre-test which I believe are now
>> fully functional.
>> http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/
>> 
>> Never done this before. Testing and comments welcome.
>
> Thanks, but please unzip the source files (e.g., in directory lisp
> and its subdirs).

Not sure what you are after here. This directory structure is the result
of "make install". It's the same directory structure as the 24.4 and
24.5 binaries, neither of which include source.

I do have some doubts about this structure (see
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=22935), but is the current
standard.

Or, am I mis-understanding?

Phil

RE: pre-test windows binaries

[Drew Adams]

> > Thanks, but please unzip the source files (e.g., in directory lisp
> > and its subdirs).
> 
> Not sure what you are after here. This directory structure is the result
> of "make install". It's the same directory structure as the 24.4 and
> 24.5 binaries, neither of which include source.
> 
> I do have some doubts about this structure (see
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=22935), but is the current
> standard.
> 
> Or, am I mis-understanding?

I have downloaded 24.4, 24.5 (and all of the other releases, back to
Emacs 22).  The Lisp files in all cases are not zipped.

Your overall archive of all of the directories is a zip archive, but
the individual Lisp files are not zipped - just as the .elc files are
not zipped.  Please treat .el the same way as .elc: do not zip.  Thx.

A few of the Lisp files are unzipped, but most are zipped.

These are the only ones in directory lisp/ that are not zipped:
cus-load.el, finder-inf.el, ldefs-boot.el, loadup.el, subdirs.el.

In directory lisp/calc/, the only one that is unzipped is
calc-loaddefs.el.  In lisp/calendar/ the only ones unzipped are:
cal-loaddefs.el, diary-loaddefs.el, and hol-loaddefs.el.

And so on.

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Phillip Lord]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

>> > Thanks, but please unzip the source files (e.g., in directory lisp
>> > and its subdirs).
>> 
>> Not sure what you are after here. This directory structure is the result
>> of "make install". It's the same directory structure as the 24.4 and
>> 24.5 binaries, neither of which include source.
>> 
>> I do have some doubts about this structure (see
>> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=22935), but is the current
>> standard.
>> 
>> Or, am I mis-understanding?
>
> I have downloaded 24.4, 24.5 (and all of the other releases, back to
> Emacs 22).  The Lisp files in all cases are not zipped.

Oh, okay, no I understand. I thought you wanted me to add the source
tarball to the binary zip, which doesn't make sense to me.


> Your overall archive of all of the directories is a zip archive, but
> the individual Lisp files are not zipped - just as the .elc files are
> not zipped.  Please treat .el the same way as .elc: do not zip.  Thx.
>
> A few of the Lisp files are unzipped, but most are zipped.
>
> These are the only ones in directory lisp/ that are not zipped:
> cus-load.el, finder-inf.el, ldefs-boot.el, loadup.el, subdirs.el.

> In directory lisp/calc/, the only one that is unzipped is
> calc-loaddefs.el.  In lisp/calendar/ the only ones unzipped are:
> cal-loaddefs.el, diary-loaddefs.el, and hol-loaddefs.el.

Yes, these ones are auto-generated, and not byte-compiled. The install
task only gzips those which are byte-compiled.

I didn't do this explicitly -- it's just the default behaviour of make
install. But you are right, I should disable this as Emacs can only open
these if there is a local gzip. I guess this is why you want it this
way?

Phil

RE: pre-test windows binaries

[Drew Adams]

> Yes, these ones are auto-generated, and not byte-compiled. The install
> task only gzips those which are byte-compiled.
> 
> I didn't do this explicitly -- it's just the default behaviour of make
> install. But you are right, I should disable this as Emacs can only open
> these if there is a local gzip. I guess this is why you want it this
> way?

I have a local gzip.  But I want to do things with the source files
without needing to use gzip.

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Phillip Lord]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

>> Yes, these ones are auto-generated, and not byte-compiled. The install
>> task only gzips those which are byte-compiled.
>> 
>> I didn't do this explicitly -- it's just the default behaviour of make
>> install. But you are right, I should disable this as Emacs can only open
>> these if there is a local gzip. I guess this is why you want it this
>> way?
>
> I have a local gzip.  But I want to do things with the source files
> without needing to use gzip.

Does Emacs not just do everything for you?

Regardless, these files need to be non gzipped -- and more importantly,
so do the info files. I've uploaded some new versions to the same
location.

Phil

RE: pre-test windows binaries

[Drew Adams]

> > I have a local gzip.  But I want to do things with the source files
> > without needing to use gzip.
> 
> Does Emacs not just do everything for you?

No.  Neither Emacs nor other programs always automatically unzip a file
on the fly.  Nor should they, necessarily.

> Regardless, these files need to be non gzipped -- and more importantly,
> so do the info files. I've uploaded some new versions to the same
> location.

Great.  Thx.

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Fabrice Popineau]

Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:

> 
> > > I have a local gzip.  But I want to do things with the source files
> > > without needing to use gzip.
> > 
> > Does Emacs not just do everything for you?
> 
> No.  Neither Emacs nor other programs always automatically unzip a file
> on the fly.  Nor should they, necessarily.
> 

Uh ? Emacs does this for quite a time. At least Emacs-25.

> > Regardless, these files need to be non gzipped -- and more 
importantly,
> > so do the info files. I've uploaded some new versions to the same
> > location.
> 
> Great.  Thx.

And all .el files are gzipped when installed by default.

Fabrice

RE: pre-test windows binaries

[Drew Adams]

> > > > I have a local gzip.  But I want to do things with the
> > > > source files without needing to use gzip.
> > >
> > > Does Emacs not just do everything for you?
> >
> > No.  Neither Emacs nor other programs always automatically
> > unzip a file on the fly.  Nor should they, necessarily.
> 
> Uh ? Emacs does this for quite a time. At least Emacs-25.

You cannot assume that everything in Emacs does so.
And certainly other programs run from Emacs, including such
simple things as `grep', depending on the platform, do not
necessarily do that.

> And all .el files are gzipped when installed by default.

"Installed"?  What does that mean for you?  Perhaps you are
assuming that what it means for you is what it means for
everyone?

For me, on MS Windows, it means just downloading and
unpacking a zip archive that includes executables, source
files, etc.

And no, zip archives distributed for Emacs releases (and
pretests) on Windows have not had the .el files gzipped.

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Fabrice Popineau]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1891 bytes --]

2016-03-23 1:38 GMT+01:00 Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>:

> > > > > I have a local gzip.  But I want to do things with the
> > > > > source files without needing to use gzip.
> > > >
> > > > Does Emacs not just do everything for you?
> > >
> > > No.  Neither Emacs nor other programs always automatically
> > > unzip a file on the fly.  Nor should they, necessarily.
> >
> > Uh ? Emacs does this for quite a time. At least Emacs-25.
>
> You cannot assume that everything in Emacs does so.
> And certainly other programs run from Emacs, including such
> simple things as `grep', depending on the platform, do not
> necessarily do that.
>
> What I mean is that by default, Emacs is able to gunzip the .el or .info
files
you visit on the fly. Thanks to :

  Does Emacs directly use zlib?                           yes

I'm not sure where it is hooked, but certainly .el and .info files are
found by default
when they are compressed under .el.gz or .info.gz

BTW: I'm using Emacs only under Windows.


> > And all .el files are gzipped when installed by default.
>
> "Installed"?  What does that mean for you?  Perhaps you are
> assuming that what it means for you is what it means for
> everyone?
>
>
It means what you get when you do 'make install' when compiling Emacs.


> For me, on MS Windows, it means just downloading and
> unpacking a zip archive that includes executables, source
> files, etc.
>

What you download is an archive of the destination directory after doing
'make ; make install'
The Makefiles do compress .el and .info files by default.
You get lisp source files, but you don't get Emacs source (C) files this
way.

I would be surprised that the zip archives of the pretest binaries be built
differently from mines:

http://semantic.supelec.fr/Software/downloads/emacs-25-20160323.zip

http://semantic.supelec.fr/Software/downloads/emacs-master-20160323.zip

Fabrice

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3350 bytes --]

RE: pre-test windows binaries

[Drew Adams]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2098 bytes --]

> > > > I have a local gzip.  But I want to do things with the
> > > > source files without needing to use gzip.
> > >
> > > Does Emacs not just do everything for you?
> >
> > No.  Neither Emacs nor other programs always automatically
> > unzip a file on the fly.  Nor should they, necessarily.
>
> Uh ? Emacs does this for quite a time. At least Emacs-25.

You cannot assume that everything in Emacs does so.
And certainly other programs run from Emacs, including such
simple things as `grep', depending on the platform, do not
necessarily do that.

What I mean is that by default, Emacs is able to gunzip the .el or .info files you visit on the fly. Thanks to :

 

  Does Emacs directly use zlib?                           yes

 

I'm not sure where it is hooked, but certainly .el and .info files are found by default

when they are compressed under .el.gz or .info.gz

 

BTW: I'm using Emacs only under Windows.

 

> And all .el files are gzipped when installed by default.

"Installed"?  What does that mean for you?  Perhaps you are
assuming that what it means for you is what it means for
everyone?

It means what you get when you do 'make install' when compiling Emacs.

 

For me, on MS Windows, it means just downloading and
unpacking a zip archive that includes executables, source
files, etc.

 

What you download is an archive of the destination directory after doing 

'make ; make install'

The Makefiles do compress .el and .info files by default.

You get lisp source files, but you don't get Emacs source (C) files this way.

 

I would be surprised that the zip archives of the pretest binaries be built differently from mines:

 

http://semantic.supelec.fr/Software/downloads/emacs-25-20160323.zip

 

http://semantic.supelec.fr/Software/downloads/emacs-master-20160323.zip

 

Fabrice

 

_________________________________

 

Sorry, I can't even make sense of your mail - can't distinguish your reply from what you are replying to.  Try plain text, please.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6299 bytes --]

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Fabrice Popineau]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 296 bytes --]

2016-03-23 23:17 GMT+01:00 Fabrice Popineau <fabrice.popineau@gmail.com>:
>
>
> http://semantic.supelec.fr/Software/downloads/emacs-25-20160323.zip
>
> http://semantic.supelec.fr/Software/downloads/emacs-master-20160323.zip
>
>
I should have added that these are W64 optimized binaries.

Fabrice

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1138 bytes --]

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Phillip Lord]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
>> And all .el files are gzipped when installed by default.
>
> "Installed"?  What does that mean for you?  Perhaps you are
> assuming that what it means for you is what it means for
> everyone?

I think it means "running make install".

If we believe that files should not be gzipped by default on windows
(and I agree with you that they should not be), then perhaps this option
needs to default to off when build on windows. As it stands, the
windows zip files I have made are not using the default options in a
couple of ways.

I have a similar question about --with-wide-int. I've build the x86_64
binaries with this option on, but I am not clear whether this is a good
thing to do or not.

> And no, zip archives distributed for Emacs releases (and
> pretests) on Windows have not had the .el files gzipped.

These have been changed now anyway.

Phil

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Fabrice Popineau]

Phillip Lord <phillip.lord <at> russet.org.uk> writes:

> 
> Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:
> >> And all .el files are gzipped when installed by default.
> >
> > "Installed"?  What does that mean for you?  Perhaps you are
> > assuming that what it means for you is what it means for
> > everyone?
> 
> I think it means "running make install".
> 
> If we believe that files should not be gzipped by default on windows
> (and I agree with you that they should not be), then perhaps this 
option
> needs to default to off when build on windows. As it stands, the
> windows zip files I have made are not using the default options in a
> couple of ways.

Albit I found it strange at first, I don't see why we should make 
Windows a special case. Both .el and .info files are gzipped when 
running 'make install', but this transparent when you visit them.
So there is no need to bother.

Try: M-x find-library , then files and the file visited is files.el.gz 
in clear.

> 
> I have a similar question about --with-wide-int. I've build the x86_64
> binaries with this option on, but I am not clear whether this is a 
good
> thing to do or not.

This option should be a no-op for a 64 bits build.

Fabrice 

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Óscar Fuentes]

Fabrice Popineau <fabrice.popineau@gmail.com> writes:

>> If we believe that files should not be gzipped by default on windows
>> (and I agree with you that they should not be), then perhaps this 
> option
>> needs to default to off when build on windows. As it stands, the
>> windows zip files I have made are not using the default options in a
>> couple of ways.
>
> Albit I found it strange at first, I don't see why we should make 
> Windows a special case. Both .el and .info files are gzipped when 
> running 'make install', but this transparent when you visit them.
> So there is no need to bother.
>
> Try: M-x find-library , then files and the file visited is files.el.gz 
> in clear.

I agree too that Windows should not be a special case. However, I'll
prefer uncompressed files on all platforms (except perhaps those that
are too constrained.) It is true that we can use zgrep instead of grep
and other text-searching tools have switches for supporting compressed
files, but having to use those is an inconvenience anyway and just solve
the text-searching task.

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Stefan Monnier]

> I agree too that Windows should not be a special case.  However, I'll
> prefer uncompressed files on all platforms (except perhaps those that
> are too constrained.)

That's your prerogative.  But I think that compressing the files is the
better default.  After all, whether we like it or not, and despite all
our efforts to make it really super easy to jump to Emacs's source code,
99.99% of those files will never ever be touched.

This said, maybe we should start to consider alternatives: while it's
great to be able to see the source code you're currently running, even
if you're out of network connectivity, it might make sense to start
making it similarly easy to jump to a VCS-controlled editable version of
that source so you can then easily send a patch upstream.

Not sure what that could/should look like.  E.g. maybe have code which
will checkout the source code from git.sv.gnu.org, or maybe include
a .git in the result of "make install".


        Stefan

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Fabrice Popineau]

Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> 
> > I agree too that Windows should not be a special case.  However, I'll
> > prefer uncompressed files on all platforms (except perhaps those that
> > are too constrained.)
> 
> That's your prerogative.  But I think that compressing the files is the
> better default.

Seems to spare about 30% of disk space on my NTFS partition:

lisp directory size: 71 827 784 bytes
actual lisp directory size on disk: 77 844 480 bytes

After uncompressing all .el.gz files :

lisp directory size: 112 124 612 bytes
actual lisp directory size on disk: 118 095 872 bytes

So there is definitely some benefit in compressing them.

Fabrice

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Phillip Lord]

Fabrice Popineau <fabrice.popineau@gmail.com> writes:

> Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>
>> 
>> > I agree too that Windows should not be a special case.  However, I'll
>> > prefer uncompressed files on all platforms (except perhaps those that
>> > are too constrained.)
>> 
>> That's your prerogative.  But I think that compressing the files is the
>> better default.
>
> Seems to spare about 30% of disk space on my NTFS partition:
>
> lisp directory size: 71 827 784 bytes
> actual lisp directory size on disk: 77 844 480 bytes
>
> After uncompressing all .el.gz files :
>
> lisp directory size: 112 124 612 bytes
> actual lisp directory size on disk: 118 095 872 bytes
>
> So there is definitely some benefit in compressing them.


And none at all if you have use NTFS compression. Also, if you stop
talking about percentages, then we are talking about 30Mb, i.e. nothing
at all.

If reading them is transparent, why not? If it requires anything at all
from the user, why?

Phil

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Phillip Lord]

Fabrice Popineau <fabrice.popineau@gmail.com> writes:

> Phillip Lord <phillip.lord <at> russet.org.uk> writes:
>> If we believe that files should not be gzipped by default on windows
>> (and I agree with you that they should not be), then perhaps this 
> option
>> needs to default to off when build on windows. As it stands, the
>> windows zip files I have made are not using the default options in a
>> couple of ways.
>
> Albit I found it strange at first, I don't see why we should make 
> Windows a special case. Both .el and .info files are gzipped when 
> running 'make install', but this transparent when you visit them.
> So there is no need to bother.

Because on other OSes we can reasonably assume that gzip will be
available, while on windows we can reasonably assume it not to be.


> Try: M-x find-library , then files and the file visited is files.el.gz 
> in clear.
>
>> 
>> I have a similar question about --with-wide-int. I've build the x86_64
>> binaries with this option on, but I am not clear whether this is a 
> good
>> thing to do or not.
>
> This option should be a no-op for a 64 bits build.


Didn't know that. Well, that's one thing less to worry about.

Phil

Re: pre-test windows binaries

[Alan Third]

On 19 March 2016 at 21:40, Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> wrote:
>
> I've made binaries of the first Emacs pre-test which I believe are now
> fully functional.
>
> http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/

Thanks for doing this. Unfortunately I get a forbidden message when I
try to download:

http://www.russet.org.uk/scratch/emacs-25.0.92-i686-w64-mingw32.zip

the 25.0.90 zip downloads fine, though.

-- 
Alan Third