GNU bug report logs - #62762
'make' often errors with "Org version mismatch" after pulling a new version of the code

Previous Next

Full log

Message #245 received at 62762 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Max Nikulin <manikulin <at> gmail.com>
Cc: yantar92 <at> posteo.net, 62762 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, bzg <at> gnu.org, dmitry <at> gutov.dev,
 monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, acm <at> muc.de
Subject: Re: circular dependencies in elisp files and make
Date: Sat, 13 May 2023 09:50:50 +0300

> Date: Sat, 13 May 2023 10:08:25 +0700
> Cc: monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, yantar92 <at> posteo.net, bzg <at> gnu.org,
>  dmitry <at> gutov.dev, 62762 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, acm <at> muc.de
> From: Max Nikulin <manikulin <at> gmail.com>
> 
> My initial idea was to compile files necessary for byte compilation at 
> first and for compilation of "regular" files load components required 
> for byte compilation and after that suppress loading of .elc files. What 
> can be better is removing all stale .elc file before compiling of 
> updates sources. A script iterates over dependency files and deletes 
> .elc if any its prerequisite has been updated. Following compilation 
> pass can safely use .elc files that are either survived from previous 
> build as up to date or just refreshed.

So you will make each build always do two byte-compilation passes
where today we have just one?  And the first one of these will use
only *.el files, including for those that are preloaded into
bootstrap-emacs?  Doesn't that sound like a significant slow-down of
the build?

Also, what about native-compilation, with or without AOT?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.