./make-dist for unicode branch

./make-dist for unicode branch

[Emfox Zhou]

when using ./make-dist --snapshot to generate a tarball for unicode branch,
I got a .tar.gz without the 'admin' directory. Is there anything more I
should do, or it's just because ./make-dist is deprecated? If in the latter
case, what should I use?

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Emfox Zhou <EmfoxZhou@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:43:41 +0800
> 
> when using ./make-dist --snapshot to generate a tarball for unicode branch,
> I got a .tar.gz without the 'admin' directory. Is there anything more I
> should do, or it's just because ./make-dist is deprecated?

Neither: make-dist excludes the admin directory on purpose, since it
is not for users and should not be in the distribution tarball.

Why did you think you need it in a snapshot?

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Emfox Zhou]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Neither: make-dist excludes the admin directory on purpose, since it
> is not for users and should not be in the distribution tarball.
>
> Why did you think you need it in a snapshot?

ar, but when I used a tarball from make-dist, it built error with some
reference to admin/unidata, while it seems everything was ok by build
emacs unicode branch directly in cvs checkouted directory.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <877j8yse2a.fsf@emfox.3322.org>, Emfox Zhou <EmfoxZhou@gmail.com> writes:

> ar, but when I used a tarball from make-dist, it built
> error with some reference to admin/unidata, while it seems
> everything was ok by build emacs unicode branch directly
> in cvs checkouted directory.

Then, it means that I made some mistake in emacs-unicode-2
branch.  Could you show me the exact error message?

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Emfox Zhou]

Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:

> In article <877j8yse2a.fsf@emfox.3322.org>, Emfox Zhou <EmfoxZhou@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> ar, but when I used a tarball from make-dist, it built
>> error with some reference to admin/unidata, while it seems
>> everything was ok by build emacs unicode branch directly
>> in cvs checkouted directory.
>
> Then, it means that I made some mistake in emacs-unicode-2
> branch.  Could you show me the exact error message?

I tried to make a debian package of emacs-unicode-2 branch, but it built error
every time, so I started to build it from scratch, without debian/ files. (If
that's right) I did a 'make bootstrap' after './configure', and here's the last
several lines of the error msg:

RUNEMACS="`/bin/pwd`/temacs"; cd /home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src/../admin/unidata; make -w RUNEMACS="${RUNEMACS}" DSTDIR=/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src/../lisp/international
/bin/sh: line 0: cd: /home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src/../admin/unidata: No such file or directory
make[3]: Entering directory `/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src'
cd ../lwlib/; make -w CC='gcc' CFLAGS='-g -O2 -Wno-pointer-sign ' MAKE='make' "C_SWITCH_X_SITE=-I/usr/X11R6/include" "C_SWITCH_X_MACHINE=" "C_SWITCH_X_SYSTEM=" "C_SWITCH_SITE=" "C_SWITCH_MACHINE=" "C_SWITCH_SYSTEM=-D_BSD_SOURCE"
make[4]: Entering directory `/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/lwlib'
make[4]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
make[4]: Leaving directory `/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/lwlib'
cd ../lib-src/; make -w make-docfile
make[4]: Entering directory `/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/lib-src'
gcc -D_BSD_SOURCE -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../src -I/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/lib-src -I/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/lib-src/../src   -g -O2 -Wno-pointer-sign  /home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/lib-src/make-docfile.c -lc -o make-docfile
make[4]: Leaving directory `/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/lib-src'
make[3]: *** No rule to make target `/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src/../lisp/abbrev.elc', needed by `../etc/DOC'.  Stop.
make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src'
make[2]: *** [/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src/../lisp/international/charprop.el] Error 2make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src'
make[1]: *** [bootstrap-build] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0'
make: *** [bootstrap] Error 2

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <873bjmryr5.fsf@emfox.3322.org>, Emfox Zhou <EmfoxZhou@gmail.com> writes:

> I tried to make a debian package of emacs-unicode-2 branch, but it built error
> every time, so I started to build it from scratch, without debian/ files. (If
> that's right) I did a 'make bootstrap' after './configure', and here's the last
> several lines of the error msg:

> RUNEMACS="`/bin/pwd`/temacs"; cd /home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src/../admin/unidata; make -w RUNEMACS="${RUNEMACS}" DSTDIR=/home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src/../lisp/international
> /bin/sh: line 0: cd: /home/emfox/file/debian/packages/emacs/emacs-23.0.0/src/../admin/unidata: No such file or directory

I've installed several fixes to emacs-unicode-2.  I made a
tarball by ./make-dist --snapshot, and from that tarball, I
could build emacs simply by "configure; make" and also by
"configure; make bootstrap".

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Emfox Zhou]

Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:

> I've installed several fixes to emacs-unicode-2.  I made a
> tarball by ./make-dist --snapshot, and from that tarball, I
> could build emacs simply by "configure; make" and also by
> "configure; make bootstrap".

I'm sorry to tell that the same error as my last letter occurred.
Here the command what EXACTLY I used:
=======
cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/cvsroot/emacs \
    co -r emacs-unicode-2 -P emacs
cd emacs
./make-dist --snapshot
tar xzf emacs-23.0.0.tar.gz
cd emacs-23.0.0/
./configure
make bootstrap
=======
Please have a look at them, and correct if there's anything wrong,
or any other more dependeny(such as different version of autotools)
I should provide.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <87vewgca2p.fsf@emfox.3322.org>, Emfox Zhou <EmfoxZhou@gmail.com> writes:

> I'm sorry to tell that the same error as my last letter occurred.
> Here the command what EXACTLY I used:
> =======
> cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/cvsroot/emacs \
>     co -r emacs-unicode-2 -P emacs
> cd emacs
> ./make-dist --snapshot
> tar xzf emacs-23.0.0.tar.gz
> cd emacs-23.0.0/
> ./configure
> make bootstrap
> =======

Ah!  I found what is wrong.  The files
lisp/international/charprop.el and
lisp/international/uni-*.el are generated by "make
bootstrap" if there exists "admin" subdir.  But, as they
don't exist in CVS, your tarball doesn't contain them (nor
'admin' subdir).

I vaguely remember that I have committed all those files
once.  I don't know why they don't exist in CVS now.  I may
have deleted them by myself for some reason (I don't
remember well). :-( Anyway, I've just committed them.  Could
you please try again?

By the way, is it the right thing to run 'make-dist
--snapshot' without building Emacs once in that directory?
The resulting tarball may not contain *.elc.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Miles Bader]

Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:
> The files lisp/international/charprop.el and
> lisp/international/uni-*.el are generated by "make bootstrap" if there
> exists "admin" subdir.  But, as they don't exist in CVS, your tarball
> doesn't contain them (nor 'admin' subdir).
>
> I vaguely remember that I have committed all those files
> once.  I don't know why they don't exist in CVS now.

If they're automatically generated, they shouldn't be in CVS...

-Miles
-- 
[|nurgle|]  ddt- demonic? so quake will have an evil kinda setting? one that
            will  make every christian in the world foamm at the mouth?
[iddt]      nurg, that's the goal

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Emfox Zhou]

Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:

>
> Ah!  I found what is wrong.  The files
> lisp/international/charprop.el and
> lisp/international/uni-*.el are generated by "make
> bootstrap" if there exists "admin" subdir.  But, as they
> don't exist in CVS, your tarball doesn't contain them (nor
> 'admin' subdir).
>
> I vaguely remember that I have committed all those files
> once.  I don't know why they don't exist in CVS now.  I may
> have deleted them by myself for some reason (I don't
> remember well). :-( Anyway, I've just committed them.  Could
> you please try again?
>
Yes, I works perfectly now.

> By the way, is it the right thing to run 'make-dist
> --snapshot' without building Emacs once in that directory?
> The resulting tarball may not contain *.elc.
>
It's just a 'snapshot' of cvs version, nothing serious.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <buor7735wc7.fsf@dhapc248.dev.necel.com>, Miles Bader <miles.bader@necel.com> writes:

> Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:
>> The files lisp/international/charprop.el and
>> lisp/international/uni-*.el are generated by "make bootstrap" if there
>> exists "admin" subdir.  But, as they don't exist in CVS, your tarball
>> doesn't contain them (nor 'admin' subdir).
>> 
>> I vaguely remember that I have committed all those files
>> once.  I don't know why they don't exist in CVS now.

> If they're automatically generated, they shouldn't be in CVS...

I basically agree with that.  But, then, how can we make
them included in a tarball generated by Emfox's way?

Shuold we signal an error in make-dist when the directory is
not yet readly for creating a tar ball?  But it's not
trivial to check if the directory is ready or not.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Miles Bader]

Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:
>> If they're automatically generated, they shouldn't be in CVS...
>
> I basically agree with that.  But, then, how can we make
> them included in a tarball generated by Emfox's way?

I admit, I have no idea what the intended purpose of "--snapshot" is,
but for the normal case (no --snapshot), make-dist contains logic to
build any files that need to be generated (.elc files, info files, etc),
by calling "make" or invoking emacs or whatever.

It seems that this data should be handled in the same way.  Since
--snapshot results in "--no-update --no-check" it would seem to be imply
that it's up to the user to make sure their tree is in a sane state.

-Miles
-- 
We are all lying in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
-Oscar Wilde

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Zhang Wei]

Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:

[...]

> I vaguely remember that I have committed all those files
> once.  I don't know why they don't exist in CVS now.  I may
> have deleted them by myself for some reason (I don't
> remember well). :-( Anyway, I've just committed them.  Could
> you please try again?
The committed uni-* files make cvs very noisy while I do "cvs update".

[...]

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:30:33 +0900
> Cc: EmfoxZhou@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> In article <buor7735wc7.fsf@dhapc248.dev.necel.com>, Miles Bader <miles.bader@necel.com> writes:
> 
> > Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:
> >> The files lisp/international/charprop.el and
> >> lisp/international/uni-*.el are generated by "make bootstrap" if there
> >> exists "admin" subdir.  But, as they don't exist in CVS, your tarball
> >> doesn't contain them (nor 'admin' subdir).
> >> 
> >> I vaguely remember that I have committed all those files
> >> once.  I don't know why they don't exist in CVS now.
> 
> > If they're automatically generated, they shouldn't be in CVS...
> 
> I basically agree with that.  But, then, how can we make
> them included in a tarball generated by Emfox's way?

What is the reason that those files are generated only if there's the
admin/ directory?

> Shuold we signal an error in make-dist when the directory is
> not yet readly for creating a tar ball?  But it's not
> trivial to check if the directory is ready or not.

I think a snapshot should be exactly like a release tarball, i.e. it
should include all the *.elc files etc.  So one needs to build Emacs
before creating a snapshot.

In other words, a snapshot is NOT simply a checked-out CVS tree, it's
a tarball like any release, except that it was made from a
non-released code base.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <uslrjqifz.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> I think a snapshot should be exactly like a release tarball, i.e. it
> should include all the *.elc files etc.  So one needs to build Emacs
> before creating a snapshot.

> In other words, a snapshot is NOT simply a checked-out CVS tree, it's
> a tarball like any release, except that it was made from a
> non-released code base.

If that is the rule, I don't mind removing uni-*.el from the
CVS tree again.   Richard, shall I?

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Richard M. Stallman]

    If that is the rule, I don't mind removing uni-*.el from the
    CVS tree again.   Richard, shall I?

I was not following this discussion and I don't know what the issue is.
Eli, could you summarize it?

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>
> CC: eliz@gnu.org, EmfoxZhou@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org,
> 	miles@gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 12:46:43 -0500
> 
>     If that is the rule, I don't mind removing uni-*.el from the
>     CVS tree again.   Richard, shall I?
> 
> I was not following this discussion and I don't know what the issue is.
> Eli, could you summarize it?

First, this is about the unicode-2 branch, not about CVS HEAD.

The problem is that a tarball created with "make-dist --snapshot" out
of a freshly checked-out CVS unicode-2 branch tree would not build
because the files lisp/international/charprop.el and
lisp/international/uni-*.el are generated by "make bootstrap" only if
there's the `admin' subdirectory.  (I asked why it looks for that
directory, but didn't see any answers.)

Handa-san tried to fix this by checking the missing files into CVS,
but Miles objected, saying that generated files should not be there.

I think this is a non-issue, because make-dist is not supposed to
produce a workable tarball unless you bootstrap first.  See
admin/make-tarball.txt, it explicitly says to bootstrap.  As I see
this, a snapshot should be exactly like a release tarball, i.e. it
should include all the *.elc files etc.  So one needs to build Emacs
before creating a snapshot.

So I don't think these files should be in CVS, and I don't think
there's any problem in make-dist.  Rather, before creating a snapshot,
people should say "make bootstrap" in their sandbox.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <uk6cmeld0.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> The problem is that a tarball created with "make-dist --snapshot" out
> of a freshly checked-out CVS unicode-2 branch tree would not build
> because the files lisp/international/charprop.el and
> lisp/international/uni-*.el are generated by "make bootstrap" only if
> there's the `admin' subdirectory.  (I asked why it looks for that
> directory, but didn't see any answers.)

Ah, sorry for forgetting to answer it.  The reason is that
those files are generated from
admin/unidata/UnicodeData.txt.  This file is about 1M byte,
so I thought it was too big to be included in a tarball.
The total of generated uni-*.el is about 200K.

> Handa-san tried to fix this by checking the missing files into CVS,
> but Miles objected, saying that generated files should not be there.

> I think this is a non-issue, because make-dist is not supposed to
> produce a workable tarball unless you bootstrap first.  See
> admin/make-tarball.txt, it explicitly says to bootstrap.  As I see
> this, a snapshot should be exactly like a release tarball, i.e. it
> should include all the *.elc files etc.  So one needs to build Emacs
> before creating a snapshot.

> So I don't think these files should be in CVS, and I don't think
> there's any problem in make-dist.  Rather, before creating a snapshot,
> people should say "make bootstrap" in their sandbox.

I didn't know about admin/make-tarball.txt.  Now I agree
that we don't have to put uni-*.el in CVS tree.  Perhaps, we
should add a comment about the requirement of bootstrap at
somewhere in make-dist.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
> CC: rms@gnu.org, EmfoxZhou@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:49:49 +0900
> 
> > The problem is that a tarball created with "make-dist --snapshot" out
> > of a freshly checked-out CVS unicode-2 branch tree would not build
> > because the files lisp/international/charprop.el and
> > lisp/international/uni-*.el are generated by "make bootstrap" only if
> > there's the `admin' subdirectory.  (I asked why it looks for that
> > directory, but didn't see any answers.)
> 
> Ah, sorry for forgetting to answer it.  The reason is that
> those files are generated from
> admin/unidata/UnicodeData.txt.  This file is about 1M byte,
> so I thought it was too big to be included in a tarball.
> The total of generated uni-*.el is about 200K.

It's too early to discuss the packaging of Emacs 23, but I'd say
UnicodeData.txt _should_ be part of the tarball, because otherwise
users will not be able to regenerate those *.el files if they want
to change some of the characters' attributes.  800KB more is not going
to change anything in what is already a 80MB to 130MB source tree.

> I didn't know about admin/make-tarball.txt.  Now I agree
> that we don't have to put uni-*.el in CVS tree.  Perhaps, we
> should add a comment about the requirement of bootstrap at
> somewhere in make-dist.

Even better, perhaps make-dist should find some way to check whether a
bootstrap was done, and refuse to work if it wasn't.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <uhd7qdth2.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> It's too early to discuss the packaging of Emacs 23, but I'd say
> UnicodeData.txt _should_ be part of the tarball, because otherwise
> users will not be able to regenerate those *.el files if they want
> to change some of the characters' attributes.

For that, they dont' have to regenerate uni-*.el files.
They can change each attribute by `put-char-code-property'.

>> I didn't know about admin/make-tarball.txt.  Now I agree
>> that we don't have to put uni-*.el in CVS tree.  Perhaps, we
>> should add a comment about the requirement of bootstrap at
>> somewhere in make-dist.

> Even better, perhaps make-dist should find some way to check whether a
> bootstrap was done, and refuse to work if it wasn't.

Yes, but, as I wrote before, I think it's not a trivial work.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Richard M. Stallman]

    because the files lisp/international/charprop.el and
    lisp/international/uni-*.el are generated by "make bootstrap" only if
    there's the `admin' subdirectory.  (I asked why it looks for that
    directory, but didn't see any answers.)

That seems really ugly.  I think we should track down the reason for
that conditional, and either document it or remove it (and solve whatever
problem in some other way).

Can you do that?

    Handa-san tried to fix this by checking the missing files into CVS,
    but Miles objected, saying that generated files should not be there.

I agree these files should not be in CVS.

    So I don't think these files should be in CVS, and I don't think
    there's any problem in make-dist.  Rather, before creating a snapshot,
    people should say "make bootstrap" in their sandbox.

If this is so, make-dist should check that a bootstrap has been done,
and fail with a clear error message otherwise.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Richard M. Stallman]

    > Even better, perhaps make-dist should find some way to check whether a
    > bootstrap was done, and refuse to work if it wasn't.

    Yes, but, as I wrote before, I think it's not a trivial work.

I think it is trivial.  Just check whether simple.elc exists.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <E1F2i39-0003bo-FT@fencepost.gnu.org>, "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>> Even better, perhaps make-dist should find some way to check whether a
>> bootstrap was done, and refuse to work if it wasn't.

>     Yes, but, as I wrote before, I think it's not a trivial work.

> I think it is trivial.  Just check whether simple.elc exists.

It doesn't assure that the bootstrap was really successful.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Richard M. Stallman]

    > I think it is trivial.  Just check whether simple.elc exists.

    It doesn't assure that the bootstrap was really successful.

Does that really matter here?

The point is to detect the case where no bootstrap was done.  It would
be nice to detect the case of a failed bootstrap also, but that is
a different matter.  It is ok to detect just the former.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <E1F3NLx-0000H7-RS@fencepost.gnu.org>, "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>> I think it is trivial.  Just check whether simple.elc exists.
>     It doesn't assure that the bootstrap was really successful.

> Does that really matter here?

> The point is to detect the case where no bootstrap was done.  
> It would be nice to detect the case of a failed bootstrap
> also, but that is a different matter.  It is ok to detect
> just the former.

I thought that the point was to prevent making an incomplete
tarball.  And, for that, it is necessary to detect the case
where bootstrap failed.  The merit of just checking if
bootstrap was done or not regardless of the result is small,
isn't it?

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
> CC: eliz@gnu.org, EmfoxZhou@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:32:37 +0900
> 
> In article <E1F3NLx-0000H7-RS@fencepost.gnu.org>, "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> I think it is trivial.  Just check whether simple.elc exists.
> >     It doesn't assure that the bootstrap was really successful.
> 
> > Does that really matter here?
> 
> > The point is to detect the case where no bootstrap was done.  
> > It would be nice to detect the case of a failed bootstrap
> > also, but that is a different matter.  It is ok to detect
> > just the former.
> 
> I thought that the point was to prevent making an incomplete
> tarball.  And, for that, it is necessary to detect the case
> where bootstrap failed.  The merit of just checking if
> bootstrap was done or not regardless of the result is small,
> isn't it?

How about if we check that all the generated source files that are not
in the repository were regenerated?  (Excluding the *.elc, *.o, and
other compiled files, of course.)  There shouldn't be too many, I
think.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <u3bj5ldti.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> How about if we check that all the generated source files that are not
> in the repository were regenerated?  (Excluding the *.elc, *.o, and
> other compiled files, of course.)  There shouldn't be too many, I
> think.

Perhaps.  But, I suggest to postpone the further discussion
on this matter because the problem is in emacs-unicode-2
branch only for the moment.  How about putting these entries
in TODO?

* Make the role of "./make-dist --snapshot" clear and, if
  necessary, fix make-dist to do that correctly.

* Decide how to handle admin/unidata/UnicodeData.txt and the
  generated files lisp/international/uni-*.el.

And, as this is administrative matter, that kind of TODO
file should be under "admin" subdir.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Miles Bader]

2006/1/30, Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>:
> I thought that the point was to prevent making an incomplete
> tarball.  And, for that, it is necessary to detect the case
> where bootstrap failed.  The merit of just checking if
> bootstrap was done or not regardless of the result is small,
> isn't it?

Why do you think that?  I'd think by far the most common case would be
people who checked out but didn't build (i.e. the easy-to-detect
case).

Emacs does not attempt to do a rigorous up-to-date check anywhere
else, why should it do that here?  That's especially true given the
low frequency of changes in unicode data files -- if the generated
files exist at all, they're probably good enough to use for a
snapshot.

-miles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch

[Richard M. Stallman]

    I thought that the point was to prevent making an incomplete
    tarball.

The aim of this suggestion is to catch a simple mistake
of running make-dist without bootstrapping first.

To check for the other case of a bootstrap that failed is a different
issue.  If someone wants to do it, I don't object.  If people don't
want to bother, that's fine too.

In any case, my suggestion is to test that simple.elc exists
and give an error if it does not.