From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id m91aGbOk217OTgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 06 Jun 2020 14:14:11 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id yIjHFLOk215IHAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 06 Jun 2020 14:14:11 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03CB794014C for ; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 14:14:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:46526 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jhZaL-00085k-Tk for larch@yhetil.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2020 10:14:09 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43322) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jhZaE-00085T-VA for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2020 10:14:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:40719) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jhZaE-0007n4-LI for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2020 10:14:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jhZaE-0007TT-Gs for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2020 10:14:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#41732: issue with emacs-lua-mode and emacs-next Resent-From: Nicolas Goaziou Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2020 14:14:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 41732 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: zimoun Received: via spool by 41732-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B41732.159145283928714 (code B ref 41732); Sat, 06 Jun 2020 14:14:02 +0000 Received: (at 41732) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jun 2020 14:13:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52265 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jhZaA-0007T4-TC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2020 10:13:59 -0400 Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.193]:53003) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jhZa8-0007Sq-Sr for 41732@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2020 10:13:57 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 185.131.40.67 Received: from localhost (40-67.ipv4.commingeshautdebit.fr [185.131.40.67]) (Authenticated sender: admin@nicolasgoaziou.fr) by relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA94C240004; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 14:13:49 +0000 (UTC) From: Nicolas Goaziou References: <87tuzo8vj6.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2020 16:13:46 +0200 In-Reply-To: (zimoun's message of "Sat, 6 Jun 2020 12:26:08 +0200") Message-ID: <87sgf8ffj9.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 41732@debbugs.gnu.org, Fredrik Salomonsson Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.01 X-TUID: IaaA8/vDNpt3 Hello, zimoun writes: > Somehow, one needs to change the Emacs version used by the Emacs > toolchain to bytecompile, right? > I do not know if it makes sense, but we could add something like > 'package-with-emacs-next' similar to 'package-with-python2' or > 'package-with-ocam4.07'. > WDYT? This sounds like serious overhead for a single package. Maybe we could try to prevent byte-compilation for the package and see what happens? Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou