GNU bug report logs - #63260
29.0.90; Regression installing/activating packages without autoloads

Previous Next

Full log

Message #40 received at 63260 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Basil Contovounesios <contovob <at> tcd.ie>, philipk <at> posteo.net
Cc: 63260 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, rpluim <at> gmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#63260: 29.0.90; Regression installing/activating packages
 without autoloads
Date: Sun, 07 May 2023 13:50:49 +0300

> From: Basil Contovounesios <contovob <at> tcd.ie>
> Cc: 63260 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,  rpluim <at> gmail.com,  philipk <at> posteo.net
> Date: Sun, 07 May 2023 11:46:29 +0200
> 
> >> While the error logged to *Messages* is relatively silent, its subequent
> >> repetition on Emacs startup is not:
> >> 
> >> $ emacs-29
> >> Error loading autoloads: (file-missing Cannot open load file
> >> No such file or directory
> >> /tmp/tmp.QQvQfBZ384/.emacs.d/elpa/sicp-20200512.1137/sicp-autoloads)
> >> 
> >> This does not seem like TRT to me.
> >
> > What happened in Emacs 28 in the same situation?
> 
> Emacs 28.2 installs and activates the sicp package without complaints,
> and generates the following -autoloads.el file, as expected:
> 
> 
> The current emacs-29 generates no such autoloads file, because the sicp
> package defines no autoloads.  But in general the -autoloads.el file is
> nevertheless needed, at least for its load-path logic.

AFAIU, in https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=62734 I asked
Philip what would happen in this case, and he replied that the changes
he proposed did TRT in that case?  So what is different here?  Philip?

Previous Next

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