From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Build failure on Windows Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 17:44:53 +0200 Message-ID: <83y3whgkga.fsf@gnu.org> References: <58BBE663.4020207@gmx.at> <86zih0yoid.fsf@gmail.com> <58BC125E.9090701@gmx.at> <83fuirkas2.fsf@gnu.org> <58BC51EC.70300@gmx.at> <834lz7jxuf.fsf@gnu.org> <58BC8313.40604@gmx.at> <83varnhyld.fsf@gnu.org> <58BD19A8.3040709@gmx.at> <83lgsiie08.fsf@gnu.org> <58BDA054.2070902@gmx.at> <838toii6mw.fsf@gnu.org> <58BE812C.2030606@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1488902455 29205 195.159.176.226 (7 Mar 2017 16:00:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 16:00:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 07 17:00:46 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1clHXY-0006dZ-Fh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 17:00:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51375 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clHXe-0003LW-Gc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 11:00:50 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44107) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clHIj-0006Dd-T7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 10:45:27 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clHIg-0003qv-0n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 10:45:25 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:38846) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clHIf-0003qo-T5; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 10:45:21 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4018 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1clHIf-0007ig-19; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 10:45:21 -0500 In-reply-to: <58BE812C.2030606@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 10:45:16 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:212813 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 10:45:16 +0100 > From: martin rudalics > CC: andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > >> I need an optimized build for coding and non-optimized one for > >> debugging. How else could I reconcile these? > > > > I didn't mean to suggest you should build from inside the tree, just > > to explain why I might miss problems that you are bumping into. > > After all nt/INSTALL says > > 1. If you want to build Emacs outside of the source tree > (recommended), create the build directory and chdir there. > > Maybe we should remove that recommendation? I don't see why. Your problems are all related to outdated Lisp files, so out-of-tree builds are unlikely to be a factor. (Which means I again don't understand why you report a perceptible degradation in build success rates, while I don't see anything close to that.) > > Are the failures always with outdated Lisp files? Or are they due to > > other aspects of the build? > > I had three typical groups of failures (some of them also on GNU/Linux > IIRC): > > - The "require cl-lib" ones - by far the largest group and by far the > greatest annoyance. Do we really need cl-lib in preloaded Elisp? OK, > this ship sailed long ago ... > > - More specific cl-generic.el related errors. IIRC usually something > about cl-defgeneric but I don't recall the precise text any more. > probably a subgroup of the first one. > > - Something I certainly never saw before about invalid bytecode. These are all related to outdated *.elc files. > Also, failures occurred only when a configure step was performed before > (which is probably obvious). Pure makes never failed. You mean, when configure is run automatically by "make"?