[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [O] can't find org-version?

From: Christopher J. White
Subject: Re: [O] can't find org-version?
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 07:34:35 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0

So in version 7.8 and earlier, org-version is both a variable and a function. The function is not useful to coders because it displays the version string as a message:

"Org-mode version 7.8.03 (release_7.8.03.437.g60ca.dirty)"


I used org-version as a variable because there was an incompatibility between 7.7 and 7.8 for the function org-export-remove-or-extract-drawers.

So, what is the proper way to get the version number in 7.9? It seems awkward to me that all clients would have to require something other than just "org" to get the version number, but I can live with that.

What I don't want to do, though, is mess around with testing for the existence of various functions and variables just to figure out where to get the version number from.

Why not just keep the variable org-version around just like in 7.8 and earlier?

Otherwise, can someone please post a code snippet that gets me the version string "7.8.03" that will work with 7.7, 7.8 and 7.9?


On 9/4/12 6:13 AM, Giovanni Ridolfi wrote:
Da: Nick Dokos <address@hidden>

Inviato: Martedì 4 Settembre 2012 14:04

Giovanni Ridolfi <address@hidden> wrote:
Would you please try to add (require 'org-install) instead of (require 'org)  
and see if org-toodledo works?

As mentioned in one of the above threads, the version of a package is pretty 
   and I'd expect it to be provided by the base require.

The variable org-version *is indeed provided* but not in the file your code 
expects it.

Is it? I can only find a function named org-version, not a variable.

Hi, Nick,

you're right, therfore, obviously ;-) I was wrong.

The function is org-version and it gets its arguments from  the variables
defined in the file  lisp/org-version.el

thanks for pointing it up.


reply via email to

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