GNU bug report logs - #69084
30; check-declare-directory chokes on lock files

Previous Next

Full log

Message #11 received at 69084 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jonas Bernoulli <jonas <at> bernoul.li>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 69084 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#69084: 30; check-declare-directory chokes on lock files
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:54:47 +0100

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 20:26:57 +0100
>> From:  Jonas Bernoulli via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
>> 
>> `check-declare-directory' chokes on lock files for libraries:
>> 
>>   check-declare-scan: Opening input file: No such file or directory,
>>     /home/jonas/.config/emacs/lib/forge/lisp/.#forge-pullreq.el
>> 
>> This simple change would take care of that:
>> 
>> diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el
>> @@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ check-declare-directory
>>    (setq root (directory-file-name (file-relative-name root)))
>>    (or (file-directory-p root)
>>        (error "Directory `%s' not found" root))
>> -  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\.el\\'")))
>> +  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\`[^.].*\\.el\\'")))
>>      (when files
>>        (apply #'check-declare-files files))))
>> 
>> I am not sure this is acceptable as it would also skip over other hidden
>> files.  IMO that would be okay; libraries arguably shouldn't be hidden
>> files.
>
> Why not exempt specifically the lock files, i.e. those whose basename
> begins with ".#"?  That can be done with an additional test on the
> candidate file names returned by directory-files-recursively.
>
> WDYT?

I've gone with the approach you suggested.

Previous Next

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