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: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 21:59:08 +0200 Message-ID: <83y3zh7ylv.fsf@gnu.org> References: <7baa18d4-2b09-caa8-005e-29008a383ad1@cs.ucla.edu> <83mvhwrgd5.fsf@gnu.org> <8539f38f-9a11-44c3-4de7-bb974c96206c@cs.ucla.edu> <8360ojpndr.fsf@gnu.org> <83shrnm0k1.fsf@gnu.org> <075B0922-F07A-4FBA-AE71-027E964A5ED4@raeburn.org> <54AAC13A-CF56-4393-A932-DC6CBBF51259@raeburn.org> <3CC6BB36-1794-4202-8243-132E0345B236@raeburn.org> <52BDCC33-546C-4F47-A230-00EBC813B038@raeburn.org> <15CF14CC-C7DE-44BA-AC7D-F0BF1F160979@raeburn.org> <9463F91F-DB82-48E1-BE01-1E2BC8DA0766@raeburn.org> <5b39d866-16ea-8cf1-f25e-6bfc3304ac2a@cornell.edu> <16B1EC9C-9BF7-432E-BE42-154740B04679@raeburn.org> <00AE6236-2C0B-4E2A-8A53-16A5C42D41A9@raeburn.org> <75C18644-F7C8-4164-BA46-CD73F4E39A93@raeburn.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1481832068 31953 195.159.176.226 (15 Dec 2016 20:01:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 20:01:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ken Raeburn Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 15 21:00:59 2016 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 1cHcD4-0006cy-Q5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 21:00:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56784 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cHcD7-0002mI-Jc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 15:01:01 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51773) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cHcCW-0002hj-An for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 15:00:25 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cHcCT-0005Le-6B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 15:00:24 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:57333) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cHcCT-0005La-3f; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 15:00:21 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1729 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cHcCE-00007U-E0; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 15:00:20 -0500 In-reply-to: <75C18644-F7C8-4164-BA46-CD73F4E39A93@raeburn.org> (message from Ken Raeburn on Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:28:15 -0500) 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:210484 Archived-At: > From: Ken Raeburn > Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:28:15 -0500 > > Question: How useable does Emacs need to be if the Lisp code is improperly installed (or not installed) and can’t be loaded? I had this same idea just the other day. We have auto-loading, so I went, so maybe just starting temacs and letting it load whatever it needs when it needs that would be good enough? Just to see what would we be up against, I ran ./temacs -Q -nl and sure thing, it errored out right away because some C code called Lisp which wasn't loaded yet. What's more, auto-loading doesn't work for preloaded packages, because we have code in autoload.el to skip/ignore autoload cookies in files mentioned in loadup.el. So my next idea would be to come up with a smaller loadup.el which only loads the stuff that is needed for temacs to start. I didn't try that yet, but I did think that Phillip's work on ldefs-boot might just be a good starting point: those ldefs-boot-*.el files might be just what we need. IMO, it would be interesting to see where this will take us, and what kind of performance could that produce. Thanks.