[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files |
Date: |
Fri, 20 May 2016 14:02:41 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) |
Alex Kost <address@hidden> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès (2016-05-17 12:12 +0300) wrote:
>
>> Alex Kost <address@hidden> skribis:
>>
>>> Ludovic Courtès (2016-05-16 15:45 +0300) wrote:
> [...]
>>>> $ git describe
>>>> v0.10.0-798-g8a7680a
>>>> $ tar tvf $(./pre-inst-env guix build -S emacs) |grep 'autoload\.el'
>>>> -rw-r--r-- root/root 37292 1970-01-01 01:00
>>>> emacs-24.5/lisp/emacs-lisp/autoload.el
>>>> -rw-r--r-- root/root 37127 1970-01-01 01:00
>>>> emacs-24.5/lisp/emacs-lisp/autoload.el.orig
>>>> -rw-r--r-- root/root 22624 1970-01-01 01:00
>>>> emacs-24.5/lisp/emacs-lisp/autoload.elc
>>>>
>>>> Upstream’s tarball already includes those three files.
>>>
>>> IIUC this source is after applying our patches (including
>>> "emacs-source-date-epoch.patch"):
>>>
>>> - “autoload.el.orig” is the original file from the upstream;
>>
>> Indeed, this one isn’t present in upstream’s tarball:
>>
>> $ wget -q -O - ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/emacs-24.5.tar.xz | tar tJvf - |
>> grep 'autoload\.'
>> -rw-rw-r-- nico/nico 37127 2015-04-02 09:23
>> emacs-24.5/lisp/emacs-lisp/autoload.el
>> -rw-r--r-- nico/nico 22624 2015-04-08 19:16
>> emacs-24.5/lisp/emacs-lisp/autoload.elc
>>
>> How come we’re introducing this one? I thought ‘patch’ did not produce
>> .orig files unless the patch failed to apply, but here the patch
>> correctly applies, only with a small offset (can be seen by running
>> ‘guix build -S emacs --check’):
>>
>> patching file lisp/loadup.el
>> patching file lisp/emacs-lisp/autoload.el
>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 361 (offset -17 lines).
>
> Indeed, I also didn't know that "patch" produces such .orig files when a
> patch applies with offset.
>
>> Apparently we have to use ‘--no-backup-if-mismatch’ to avoid that.
>
> You even found the flag, thanks! So is it OK to apply the attached
> patch to core-updates?
The patch LGTM, but since this is a full-rebuild change, I prefer keep
it for the next core-updates cycle. Let’s try not to forget about it.
:-)
Thanks,
Ludo’.
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Alex Kost, 2016/05/11
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Ludovic Courtès, 2016/05/16
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Alex Kost, 2016/05/16
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Ludovic Courtès, 2016/05/17
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Alex Kost, 2016/05/19
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files,
Ludovic Courtès <=
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Leo Famulari, 2016/05/20
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Alex Kost, 2016/05/21
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Ludovic Courtès, 2016/05/21
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Alex Kost, 2016/05/24
- Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Alex Kost, 2016/05/20
Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files, Alex Kost, 2016/05/19