On 2025-01-29T19:46:04.000+01:00, Pip Cet <pipcet@protonmail.com> wrote:
> without going into too much detail, I think bytecomp.elc is not what it
> should be.  Would it be possible for you to provide the 184350-byte
> version you've seen in the broken build, and the (possibly 184350-byte)
> version that produced a working Emacs?  The differences might be very
> interesting.  Note that it is the .elc files that are interesting, not
> their .el sources, and Emacs ignores the .elc extension when tab
> completing by default.
> 
> (Those files are long; if you cat them together and pipe through zstd
> -22 --ultra --long, the result should be short enough to send).
> 
> If you sill have time, warnings.elc may also be interesting.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Pip

Here you are!