From unknown Tue Jun 24 05:09:16 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#66125 <66125@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#66125 <66125@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect Reply-To: bug#66125 <66125@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 12:09:16 +0000 retitle 66125 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect reassign 66125 emacs submitter 66125 Ulrich Mueller severity 66125 normal thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Sep 20 12:16:44 2023 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Sep 2023 16:16:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60247 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qizsa-0003g0-Jc for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:16:44 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:50200) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qizsX-0003fi-57 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:16:42 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qizsI-0006qP-AC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:16:26 -0400 Received: from woodpecker.gentoo.org ([140.211.166.183] helo=smtp.gentoo.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qizsG-0004v3-BK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:16:26 -0400 From: Ulrich Mueller To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Subject: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:16:16 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=140.211.166.183; envelope-from=ulm@gentoo.org; helo=smtp.gentoo.org X-Spam_score_int: -41 X-Spam_score: -4.2 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/) The --with-small-ja-dic configure option of Emacs 29.1 seems to have no effect. Actual result: It will still install the large version of the dictionary, with a size of almost 5 MB: $ ls -l /usr/share/emacs/29.1/lisp/leim/ja-dic/ total 9120 -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4798823 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.el -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4535697 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.elc By their date, these are presumably the pre-built files from the distribution tarball. Expected result: A smaller-size Japanese dictionary (about 2.2 MB) should be installed, as the configure option says. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Sep 20 12:28:01 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Sep 2023 16:28:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60267 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj03V-0003yC-8h for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:28:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55042) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj03Q-0003xr-UP for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:28:00 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qj03B-00073O-Ju; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:27:41 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=Rum9yYLet4cM+XAWss70q7aTpIG+moxM+L4Pw30ApRc=; b=HWbVW8XFhLHv nt/7lZBt/tMkoZXm9UF9FitqvrJDolIf3znPsSGOW2IgRpwtaelAXsMc5v7kjp5ivJ79aQtsY2v+q uFhhdPdy13NFQVVnk/rQwZkR1aqCvr9eA2wtUy3EVRQSYjnmOUTI59DtyEgT6ns9sDNvPcuASH3D8 4DG0lEbL5NUYAXi0+GAD5jv+k7VZm2LTRargRh+ioYWipUMQ6rMQOnblSqSbYr1QF2oah9ENJbeTA bpl8DN2tzrUxscMlUX04+cpuo3gRymKUDjX++UA1I3fXk8Glu1MMnWjNff0XszeiPI31g0u5OojDI MgspWRuzy3u8skc3Xm/Sow==; Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 19:27:46 +0300 Message-Id: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Ulrich Mueller In-Reply-To: (message from Ulrich Mueller on Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:16:16 +0200) Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect References: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Ulrich Mueller > Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:16:16 +0200 > > The --with-small-ja-dic configure option of Emacs 29.1 seems to have no > effect. > > Actual result: > It will still install the large version of the dictionary, with a size > of almost 5 MB: > > $ ls -l /usr/share/emacs/29.1/lisp/leim/ja-dic/ > total 9120 > -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4798823 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.el > -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4535697 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.elc > > By their date, these are presumably the pre-built files from the > distribution tarball. > > Expected result: > A smaller-size Japanese dictionary (about 2.2 MB) should be installed, > as the configure option says. Please tell more details: . how did you build Emacs with this option? please show all the steps, starting from unpacking the tarball . how is SMALL_JA_DIC defined in leim/Makefile when you configure with this option? . when (on what date) did you try building Emacs with that option? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Sep 20 12:58:52 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Sep 2023 16:58:53 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60280 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj0XM-0004pu-MR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:58:52 -0400 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]:40149) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj0XK-0004ph-Mm for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:58:51 -0400 From: Ulrich Mueller To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect In-Reply-To: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 20 Sep 2023 19:27:46 +0300") References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:58:29 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >>>>> On Wed, 20 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Please tell more details: > . how did you build Emacs with this option? please show all the > steps, starting from unpacking the tarball $ tar xf /var/cache/distfiles/emacs-29.1.tar.xz $ cd emacs-29.1 $ ./configure --with-small-ja-dic [...] Does Emacs generate a smaller-size Japanese dictionary? yes [...] $ make [...] $ ls -l lisp/leim/ja-dic/ total 9120 -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4798823 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.el -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4535697 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.elc > . how is SMALL_JA_DIC defined in leim/Makefile when you configure > with this option? $ grep ^SMALL_JA_DIC leim/Makefile SMALL_JA_DIC = yes > . when (on what date) did you try building Emacs with that option? 2023-09-20, i.e. today. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Sep 20 13:02:34 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Sep 2023 17:02:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60286 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj0aw-0004xR-6w for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:02:34 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56822) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj0as-0004xA-3S for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:02:33 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qj0ab-0004EL-Vz; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:02:14 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=Dvg1xv5p6pZdL7EX+RLg6HPQqO7XGHwLskBQ8flZzqE=; b=YhL9rfye+O6w GZZPMS4C2gbTuChwkKKaVd/1SpZBvHbZ8ycc+3qaoOhM10ty0kic2Rwje2AHWOYb9oc2S2YchH4O4 XGGyItVjV3BlBZ49Zhlu0CylgXg+1Huyfzj7PklWmRLYiF4chkQXnSWGt2+jgJacTQxbnNyjWIddc l5a/Fapqu7w3wwKDw5T1kIFYpV1TwXhVhpAqpaLTGHVeGCI/1c+Q8btg4uhn8U5eQ8TYeD3JpTauV KG+zJQyCsd0m98+lqH3Bm9RVcld42NfOg0AC6J75G85t7omb+z7qKYJ8uRbWMg99sXYXi0DyB02M/ p2cRLgZPutYBmcXebY+elg==; Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 20:02:19 +0300 Message-Id: <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Ulrich Mueller In-Reply-To: (message from Ulrich Mueller on Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:58:29 +0200) Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Ulrich Mueller > Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:58:29 +0200 > > >>>>> On Wed, 20 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Please tell more details: > > > . how did you build Emacs with this option? please show all the > > steps, starting from unpacking the tarball > > $ tar xf /var/cache/distfiles/emacs-29.1.tar.xz > $ cd emacs-29.1 > $ ./configure --with-small-ja-dic > [...] > Does Emacs generate a smaller-size Japanese dictionary? yes > [...] > $ make > [...] > $ ls -l lisp/leim/ja-dic/ > total 9120 > -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4798823 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.el > -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4535697 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.elc > > > . how is SMALL_JA_DIC defined in leim/Makefile when you configure > > with this option? > > $ grep ^SMALL_JA_DIC leim/Makefile > SMALL_JA_DIC = yes > > > . when (on what date) did you try building Emacs with that option? > > 2023-09-20, i.e. today. OK, thanks. In its current form, this option will only make a difference if you remove the ja-dic files that came with the tarball, and then rebuild. We should improve this, although it strikes me that such an obscure feature, which is also not recommended, perhaps doesn't deserve the effort... From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Sep 20 14:21:26 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Sep 2023 18:21:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60353 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj1pF-0007Jl-Og for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:21:25 -0400 Received: from woodpecker.gentoo.org ([140.211.166.183]:55410 helo=smtp.gentoo.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj1pC-0007JT-SG for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:21:24 -0400 From: Ulrich Mueller To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect In-Reply-To: <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 20 Sep 2023 20:02:19 +0300") References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 20:21:03 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >>>>> On Wed, 20 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > OK, thanks. In its current form, this option will only make a > difference if you remove the ja-dic files that came with the tarball, > and then rebuild. We should improve this, Maybe omit ja-dic.{el,elc} from the tarball, when they depend on the configuration? > although it strikes me that such an obscure feature, which is also not > recommended, perhaps doesn't deserve the effort... Somebody must have found the feature important enough to add a configure option for it. :) To add some context, even if it is only loosely related: This originates from Gentoo bug https://bugs.gentoo.org/914368 where a user observed a segmentation fault in libgccjit when native-compiling ja-dic.el. (However, that bug occured with a somewhat obscure system, and we don't really have proof that it was related to the size of the file.) From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Sep 20 14:54:56 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Sep 2023 18:54:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60384 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj2Lg-0008TZ-7i for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:54:56 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44266) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qj2La-0008TC-Cw for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:54:55 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qj2LL-0006l7-92; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:54:35 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=xP5pAtGNMNuwo+pvNwWvOdWnqWbW6lbHNlM+A+puOeM=; b=SMnCshLf4Iq2 hixuPa4OmlR3g3wWdOPpSQ3VELBuNbkV9DPJ5H2Hs3Nj8O8dE17HVl5JWbT/KI3uxBlZsKxRQ7TqL zSWmXCAzp9r9FjGvYss/ynpdiUnlpIuCb0t4uSXJFH+RpIK6HlYEsw8wMrQFYlA4GC9nTqZF+4keq Whdq9aFKdLHQaMkdxZDpLxlb0rqxHiKtUe88QIfAak5eG59tjVDwOgk125dR4qt/42jSEZGQ71tK1 oTEBv1KUrWM6Cp0cscvdZcgnDnOUPiCNUIyWCm8MyaKAomG8eE8fRexgDYw/GamgNUoqR2F0KnlJt 6cxeJIdXQrSZjfh6LiThzw==; Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 21:54:35 +0300 Message-Id: <8334z8brpw.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Ulrich Mueller In-Reply-To: (message from Ulrich Mueller on Wed, 20 Sep 2023 20:21:03 +0200) Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Ulrich Mueller > Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 20:21:03 +0200 > > >>>>> On Wed, 20 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > OK, thanks. In its current form, this option will only make a > > difference if you remove the ja-dic files that came with the tarball, > > and then rebuild. We should improve this, > > Maybe omit ja-dic.{el,elc} from the tarball, when they depend on the > configuration? No, that's a cure that is worse than the disease: those dictionaries take a while to generate. I think I know how to fix this, please stay tuned. > > although it strikes me that such an obscure feature, which is also not > > recommended, perhaps doesn't deserve the effort... > > Somebody must have found the feature important enough to add a configure > option for it. :) No one intended for that option to be used. > To add some context, even if it is only loosely related: This originates > from Gentoo bug https://bugs.gentoo.org/914368 where a user observed a > segmentation fault in libgccjit when native-compiling ja-dic.el. > (However, that bug occured with a somewhat obscure system, and we don't > really have proof that it was related to the size of the file.) I have an AOT build on GNU/Linux, and I see a ja-dic*.eln file there, so I had no problems with natively compiling it. Ans segfaults in libgccjit should be reported to the GCC folks, I think. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Sep 23 03:55:26 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Sep 2023 07:55:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37692 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjxU6-00057c-20 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 03:55:26 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42238) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjxU3-00057J-Bg for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 03:55:24 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qjxTm-0006mx-PK; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 03:55:06 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=YR2J45kRyOgoBNBUxiANjn99wBW7ieKGWwStRuFAu/M=; b=DcdbpfsfGVUf 4PIDWkisTksi+vnmziXozFJaR7Uoa6QcaiyXmRFJtU2FsSNubhMn+cnO02G/jPejsnPKHNglglhNF qTO652Ea+U2/qqpmvgeIc1Iy6CCxpfo/oN3U4gprkbY0h1eexQ7niZmu9ESnfvm+Kz4S5josZXKOE DW+Qjg8qVtpRKZ5LDnvOqwOq+OaEQbu5TgqwRW9HAwC6czW0pCEZdJVOLKWkOmuVoyJFhqm+LqsQg DiH5dE5IzEgQh7LPFzKJQBEJUAExoccb/dfXeBaFTn1PjygwpoQYaM6UPcELtvwOuTFDC87AdmbBs g2jTAwHBFe+I+dgz2AOJ3Q==; Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 10:55:18 +0300 Message-Id: <837coh5no9.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: ulm@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Wed, 20 Sep 2023 20:02:19 +0300) Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 20:02:19 +0300 > From: Eli Zaretskii > > > From: Ulrich Mueller > > Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org > > Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:58:29 +0200 > > > > >>>>> On Wed, 20 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > > Please tell more details: > > > > > . how did you build Emacs with this option? please show all the > > > steps, starting from unpacking the tarball > > > > $ tar xf /var/cache/distfiles/emacs-29.1.tar.xz > > $ cd emacs-29.1 > > $ ./configure --with-small-ja-dic > > [...] > > Does Emacs generate a smaller-size Japanese dictionary? yes > > [...] > > $ make > > [...] > > $ ls -l lisp/leim/ja-dic/ > > total 9120 > > -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4798823 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.el > > -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 4535697 Jul 23 10:11 ja-dic.elc > > > > > . how is SMALL_JA_DIC defined in leim/Makefile when you configure > > > with this option? > > > > $ grep ^SMALL_JA_DIC leim/Makefile > > SMALL_JA_DIC = yes > > > > > . when (on what date) did you try building Emacs with that option? > > > > 2023-09-20, i.e. today. > > OK, thanks. In its current form, this option will only make a > difference if you remove the ja-dic files that came with the tarball, > and then rebuild. We should improve this, although it strikes me that > such an obscure feature, which is also not recommended, perhaps > doesn't deserve the effort... Please try the patch below. If it gives good results, I will install it on the emacs-29 branch. Thanks. diff --git a/leim/Makefile.in b/leim/Makefile.in index 4c6c317..03da0f7 100644 --- a/leim/Makefile.in +++ b/leim/Makefile.in @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ SHELL = # Here are the things that we expect ../configure to edit. srcdir=@srcdir@ top_builddir = @top_builddir@ +top_srcdir = @top_srcdir@ # Where the generated files go. leimdir = ${srcdir}/../lisp/leim @@ -134,9 +135,19 @@ ${leimdir}/leim-list.el: ${leimdir}/ja-dic/ja-dic.el: | $(leimdir)/ja-dic +# This is used to support regeneration of ja-dic when the SMALL_JA_DIC +# option is flipped by the configure-time option. +small-ja-dic-option: ../config.status + $(AM_V_GEN)if test -f ${leimdir}/ja-dic/ja-dic.el; then \ + sed -n "/small ja-dic option: $(SMALL_JA_DIC)/p" \ + ${leimdir}/ja-dic/ja-dic.el > $@.$$$$ && \ + ${top_srcdir}/build-aux/move-if-change $@.$$$$ $@; \ + else echo \ + ";; Generated with small ja-dic option: $(SMALL_JA_DIC)" > $@; fi + .PHONY: generate-ja-dic generate-ja-dic: ${leimdir}/ja-dic/ja-dic.el -${leimdir}/ja-dic/ja-dic.el: $(srcdir)/SKK-DIC/SKK-JISYO.L +${leimdir}/ja-dic/ja-dic.el: $(srcdir)/SKK-DIC/SKK-JISYO.L small-ja-dic-option $(AM_V_GEN)$(RUN_EMACS) -batch -l ja-dic-cnv \ -f batch-skkdic-convert -dir "$(leimdir)/ja-dic" $(JA_DIC_NO_REDUCTION_OPTION) "$<" diff --git a/lisp/international/ja-dic-cnv.el b/lisp/international/ja-dic-cnv.el index 9ce31f1..46848c1 100644 --- a/lisp/international/ja-dic-cnv.el +++ b/lisp/international/ja-dic-cnv.el @@ -346,6 +346,11 @@ skkdic-convert (erase-buffer) (buffer-disable-undo) (generate-lisp-file-heading ja-dic-filename 'skkdic-convert :code nil) + ;; The following line is tested by leim/Makefile.in to see if + ;; ja-dic.el needs to be regenerated because the SMALL_JA_DIC + ;; option was flipped. + (insert (format ";; Generated with small ja-dic option: %s\n\n" + (if no-reduction "no" "yes"))) (insert ";; Original SKK dictionary file: " (file-relative-name (expand-file-name filename) dirname) "\n\n" From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Sep 23 05:16:04 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Sep 2023 09:16:04 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37772 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjyk6-0001mB-R9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 05:16:04 -0400 Received: from woodpecker.gentoo.org ([140.211.166.183]:53638 helo=smtp.gentoo.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjyk0-0001lS-03 for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 05:16:00 -0400 From: Ulrich Mueller To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect In-Reply-To: <837coh5no9.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 23 Sep 2023 10:55:18 +0300") References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> <837coh5no9.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 11:15:34 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >>>>> On Sat, 23 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Please try the patch below. If it gives good results, I will install > it on the emacs-29 branch. Hm, this creates an empty leim/small-ja-dic-option file after the first round of configure+make: $ ./configure --with-small-ja-dic && make -j8 [...] INFO Collecting OKURI-NASI entries [...] $ ls -ltr leim/small-ja-dic-option lisp/leim/ja-dic/ja-dic.el* -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 0 Sep 23 10:43 leim/small-ja-dic-option -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 2257189 Sep 23 10:43 lisp/leim/ja-dic/ja-dic.el -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 2248443 Sep 23 10:43 lisp/leim/ja-dic/ja-dic.elc Only after running configure+make for a second time the file contains the information (but the dictionary is being rebuilt, although the option hasn't changed): $ ./configure --with-small-ja-dic && make -j8 [...] INFO Collecting OKURI-NASI entries [...] $ ls -ltr leim/small-ja-dic-option lisp/leim/ja-dic/ja-dic.el* -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 43 Sep 23 10:45 leim/small-ja-dic-option -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 2257189 Sep 23 10:46 lisp/leim/ja-dic/ja-dic.el -rw-r--r-- 1 ulm users 2248443 Sep 23 10:46 lisp/leim/ja-dic/ja-dic.elc $ cat leim/small-ja-dic-option ;; Generated with small ja-dic option: yes Also, shouldn't leim/small-ja-dic-option be added to the release tarball? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Sep 23 05:35:56 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Sep 2023 09:35:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37813 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjz3I-0002IU-T9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 05:35:56 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58814) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qjz3D-0002IE-ID for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 05:35:51 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qjz2w-00084V-Qx; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 05:35:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=CHKRCmXPFsLnrdCBzP4QYjQq6dGvIBKg0R3dg+Z/Sn4=; b=IiPvMn48TF8n Kh38vhcNxAFHIKOfX0T8DC8RC1liwTDc2Jy58BK96ZGwin1FH1LKCgStwcy7eZ49rtS+TeHf9fVbM g4cyAGy+y4seScYTk/UDif3w14K+MSNicuYofGP2dVCNMeytInjDlVAiIrpkPq4ysPGzR83BsNOhm tEzm7HhyDOqnSP+3T+h6eUkJ6nGidlLHUsbdDM8nBOcM2wcWX5gKfx7EYIABn9FEbsrrUPpUeHCbp VA/BCsqnGNbZpOmNmnHV5+k3JMj5hpXAFup6vKnU9X3PJTuGFHVxms8WawWm6v4Y7iFNU+pM17zw4 yzncxqsOfpiTzc/+VFAurA==; Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 12:35:37 +0300 Message-Id: <83wmwh44gm.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Ulrich Mueller In-Reply-To: (message from Ulrich Mueller on Sat, 23 Sep 2023 11:15:34 +0200) Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> <837coh5no9.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Ulrich Mueller > Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 11:15:34 +0200 > > >>>>> On Sat, 23 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Please try the patch below. If it gives good results, I will install > > it on the emacs-29 branch. > > Hm, this creates an empty leim/small-ja-dic-option file after the first > round of configure+make: That's a one-time issue. I didn't think it was worth extra hassle to avoid that. Do you see any problem with that? (The "if test" part of the new target's rules could be updated to check that the small-ja-dic-option file exists, and generate a non-empty file if not.) > Also, shouldn't leim/small-ja-dic-option be added to the release > tarball? Yes. I will figure this out when the next release's pretest will be prepared. (We also need to add the file to some *clean targets.) From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Sep 23 07:31:00 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Sep 2023 11:31:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37869 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qk0qi-0002KF-0A for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 07:31:00 -0400 Received: from woodpecker.gentoo.org ([140.211.166.183]:38420 helo=smtp.gentoo.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qk0qf-000258-R9 for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 07:30:58 -0400 From: Ulrich Mueller To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect In-Reply-To: <83wmwh44gm.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 23 Sep 2023 12:35:37 +0300") References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> <837coh5no9.fsf@gnu.org> <83wmwh44gm.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 13:30:36 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >> Hm, this creates an empty leim/small-ja-dic-option file after the first >> round of configure+make: > That's a one-time issue. I didn't think it was worth extra hassle to > avoid that. Do you see any problem with that? Not sure. Is it guaranteed that the empty file won't be included in the release tarball? > (The "if test" part of the new target's rules could be updated to > check that the small-ja-dic-option file exists, and generate a > non-empty file if not.) IMHO this would be cleaner. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Sep 23 08:39:45 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Sep 2023 12:39:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37930 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qk1vF-0004Ub-2b for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 08:39:45 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35844) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qk1vD-0004UO-VJ for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 08:39:44 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qk1uv-0005bM-Fx; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 08:39:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=bmRkccqfazTOvEdCguuJYrpD/sNmFpBcnCGlmWW7oFA=; b=lufE6MEvByUZ b4ZT/jXDemjVZxSIu6I2g/wfCKsSUTrOkBJe231XLS5cpqJeAaWSJGPAbgrO8QEVH7Mve8xYG/PYO KGZfNvKPb7uYgTPPLJjehaL6sawOKyIWUfAXsEp0klKJv54t++jp2xMQXOkZRzELFlSRSj8XoqJav C991yTH1CCx7Peg/ya2zAFEFsCuwu+9AgGoQZrpunsKnas3d8iuaeQSSJdYXsSR420gFuXiOaBS1O f3fhLfN9ic4BC0j8EHhTYALcyzd0WWKol55jHdrNkrTm/79ivRl1UVY/0ruGi4nTT7zyF1sD1TWg/ Nn6X5kAOX9NQifz95IAxLw==; Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 15:39:30 +0300 Message-Id: <83o7ht3vy5.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Ulrich Mueller In-Reply-To: (message from Ulrich Mueller on Sat, 23 Sep 2023 13:30:36 +0200) Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> <837coh5no9.fsf@gnu.org> <83wmwh44gm.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Ulrich Mueller > Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 13:30:36 +0200 > > >> Hm, this creates an empty leim/small-ja-dic-option file after the first > >> round of configure+make: > > > That's a one-time issue. I didn't think it was worth extra hassle to > > avoid that. Do you see any problem with that? > > Not sure. Is it guaranteed that the empty file won't be included in the > release tarball? > > > (The "if test" part of the new target's rules could be updated to > > check that the small-ja-dic-option file exists, and generate a > > non-empty file if not.) > > IMHO this would be cleaner. Can you try that and see if there are no other issues? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Sep 23 17:29:58 2023 Received: (at 66125) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Sep 2023 21:29:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40698 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qkACM-00060u-8f for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 17:29:58 -0400 Received: from woodpecker.gentoo.org ([2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]:33685 helo=smtp.gentoo.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qkACJ-00060g-0g for 66125@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 17:29:57 -0400 From: Ulrich Mueller To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect In-Reply-To: <83o7ht3vy5.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 23 Sep 2023 15:39:30 +0300") References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> <837coh5no9.fsf@gnu.org> <83wmwh44gm.fsf@gnu.org> <83o7ht3vy5.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 23:29:33 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125 Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >>>>> On Sat, 23 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> > (The "if test" part of the new target's rules could be updated to >> > check that the small-ja-dic-option file exists, and generate a >> > non-empty file if not.) >> >> IMHO this would be cleaner. > Can you try that and see if there are no other issues? I did some tests and ended up replacing the small-ja-dic-option recipe in leim/Makefile.in with something very simple: # This is used to support regeneration of ja-dic when the SMALL_JA_DIC # option is flipped by the configure-time option. small-ja-dic-option: ../config.status $(AM_V_GEN)echo "small ja-dic option: $(SMALL_JA_DIC)" > $@.$$$$ && \ ${top_srcdir}/build-aux/move-if-change $@.$$$$ $@ AFAICS this does what is intended, i.e. the detour via recording the option in ja-dic.el isn't even needed. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 24 08:34:33 2023 Received: (at 66125-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Sep 2023 12:34:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41241 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qkOJk-0008OO-VI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 08:34:33 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50768) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qkOJi-0008OB-QQ for 66125-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 08:34:31 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qkOJR-0007OT-Kt; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 08:34:13 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=iwbB/wUu5kRxBg2fI3qi7DtnXouvwAOclkCabrYT+08=; b=kYSuFHSkZc4Z K1GnI75Pg4/c3HTK6G9D4cdzqx3caTm0CB3KpAC6zFq0LeGSqkSJZ0qpt4h8VeCxU122xSYZHxa1v 7ZtMa6nZGrSnnFM3w+PH60iLm79GD1FwSK1XsS9su+QMCN3lm56mtBHGIfNil8yk15JsO1LD63XsY KnuIMsChEtsoDt8u6TxgBbFsPS/vBN2TjiULK13INk3x7ljRtksgKTggK7VIFD7ywuMUJOqjmKXhH jc2ecvMCmtLwKNxhoLNGnX3K3O5XUwxwqw4gP6P1ehFNCDHFqKYfYSZ4CZobJW/zBOCbCqGkGYCWK iw2y0GjBMVaW1w9tzmn59A==; Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2023 15:33:41 +0300 Message-Id: <83r0mn3g4a.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Ulrich Mueller In-Reply-To: (message from Ulrich Mueller on Sat, 23 Sep 2023 23:29:33 +0200) Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> <837coh5no9.fsf@gnu.org> <83wmwh44gm.fsf@gnu.org> <83o7ht3vy5.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125-done Cc: 66125-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Ulrich Mueller > Cc: 66125@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 23:29:33 +0200 > > >>>>> On Sat, 23 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > >> > (The "if test" part of the new target's rules could be updated to > >> > check that the small-ja-dic-option file exists, and generate a > >> > non-empty file if not.) > >> > >> IMHO this would be cleaner. > > > Can you try that and see if there are no other issues? > > I did some tests and ended up replacing the small-ja-dic-option recipe > in leim/Makefile.in with something very simple: > > # This is used to support regeneration of ja-dic when the SMALL_JA_DIC > # option is flipped by the configure-time option. > small-ja-dic-option: ../config.status > $(AM_V_GEN)echo "small ja-dic option: $(SMALL_JA_DIC)" > $@.$$$$ && \ > ${top_srcdir}/build-aux/move-if-change $@.$$$$ $@ > > AFAICS this does what is intended, i.e. the detour via recording the > option in ja-dic.el isn't even needed. Thanks, I went with your suggestion in leim/Makefile.in. But I kept the recording of the value in ja-dic.el, as I think it's a good idea nonetheless, for future investigations of possible issues. And with that, I'm closing the bug. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 24 10:57:51 2023 Received: (at 66125-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Sep 2023 14:57:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43411 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qkQYR-0003qi-Ck for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 10:57:51 -0400 Received: from woodpecker.gentoo.org ([140.211.166.183]:53526 helo=smtp.gentoo.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qkQYN-0003qP-Es for 66125-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 10:57:49 -0400 From: Ulrich Mueller To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#66125: 29.1; configure --with-small-ja-dic has no effect In-Reply-To: <83r0mn3g4a.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sun, 24 Sep 2023 15:33:41 +0300") References: <838r90byil.fsf@gnu.org> <834jjobwx1.fsf@gnu.org> <837coh5no9.fsf@gnu.org> <83wmwh44gm.fsf@gnu.org> <83o7ht3vy5.fsf@gnu.org> <83r0mn3g4a.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2023 16:57:25 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 66125-done Cc: 66125-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >>>>> On Sun, 24 Sep 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Thanks, I went with your suggestion in leim/Makefile.in. Thank you. > But I kept the recording of the value in ja-dic.el, as I think it's a > good idea nonetheless, for future investigations of possible issues. No disagreement there. From unknown Tue Jun 24 05:09:16 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:24:06 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator