emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] [bug] Symbol's function definition is void: org-pop-to-buffer-sa


From: Nick Dokos
Subject: Re: [O] [bug] Symbol's function definition is void: org-pop-to-buffer-same-window
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 10:05:18 -0500

Nick Dokos <address@hidden> wrote:

> Kenny Meyer <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > I am getting the same message here upon calling various org-functions
> > (e.g.: org-drill, org-submit-bug-report), since I have compiled
> > org-mode from git, but I am not sure where exactly the error was
> > introduced.
> > 
> > > Explicitly Loading `org-compat' does cure this problem...
> > Requiring org-compat does not fix that here.
> > Can you tell me where exactly you loaded org-compat?
> > 
> > Org-mode version 7.7 (release_7.7.617.gb1f2)
> > GNU Emacs 24.0.50.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.2.0) of 
> > 2011-09-29
> > 
> > --
> > Kenny Meyer
> > 
> 
> IIRC, the cure for macro problems like this is to
> 

Sorry - I thought it was a macro but it isn't. Nevertheless,
the note below still stands.

Nick

>       make clean
>       make
> 
> (alternatively, make clean and just use uncompiled code). There might be
> something missing to cause it, but I don't think so in this case: I
> tried a minimal .emacs with the same version as above (Org-mode version
> 7.7 (release_7.7.617.gb1f2) and I can start, goto the active clock and
> stop it with no errors.
> 
> Nick
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Sebastien Vauban
> > <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > In conditions which I consider unchanged (I speak of my emacs config 
> > > file),
> > > with the latest Org-mode version, I now have the message:
> > >
> > >    let*: Symbol's function definition is void: 
> > > org-pop-to-buffer-same-window
> > >
> > > when doing, for example, `C-c C-x C-j' to jump on the currently clocked 
> > > item.
> > >
> > > Explicitly Loading `org-compat' does cure this problem... But we must 
> > > miss a
> > > `require' somewhere, but where?  In `org.el' itself?
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >  Seb
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sebastien Vauban
> > >
> > >
> > 
> 



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]