[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?
From: |
Colin Baxter |
Subject: |
Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"? |
Date: |
Sat, 22 Apr 2023 20:12:02 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/30.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
>>>>> Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> writes:
> On 22/04/2023 14:51, Colin Baxter wrote:
>>>>>>> Max Nikulin writes:
>> > On 21/04/2023 23:17, Colin Baxter wrote:
>> > emacs -Q -l org-agenda Only message and scratch buffers
>> present.
> C-h e to check messages, but since errors or warnings buffer does
> not appear it should be OK.
>> >> 1. emacs <RET> > Till `org-reload' C-c C-x ! at the step 10
>> org is not > involved. Does you init file loads some Org
>> component or some Org > buffer is created at startup? To be sure
>> > M-: (featurep 'org) "No match."
> I would expect either nil or t. Did you press M-x that is
> `execute-extended-command' instead of M-: that is
> `eval-expression'? Alternatively you may execute in in the
> *scratch* buffer
> (featurep 'org)
> and C-j or C-x C-e when cursor is immediately after the closing
> parenthesis.
Sorry, my mistake. I didn't follow your recipe exactly. If enter
(featurep 'org) in the scratch buffer and do C-j then I get nil.
>> >> 2. M-x vc-dir <RET> 3. Navigate to ~/git/org-mode. 4. + (to
>> >> pull) 5. M-x compile <RET> 6. make clean <RET> 7. make <RET>
>> In the case of build org-mode, I first select "make clean" from
>> the history of "M-x compile". Then I do "M-x compile" again and
>> select "make" from the history. The effect is the same using the
>> terminal, except the outputs are now contained in emacs buffers.
> Thank you for explanation. For some reason I believed that M-x
> compile invokes make without additional prompt. So
> make clean; make
> sounds perfectly reasonable.
>> >> 8. In an eshell buffer navigate to ~/git/emacs/lisp. >> Typo!
>> I meant navigate to ~/git/org-mode/lisp. >> 9. rm *.elc <RET> >
>> Why did you decided to manually delete *.elc files? I have lost
>> at > which step you got the warning. I expect that "make clean"
>> should > remove .elc files. If I don't delete the elc files in
>> ~/git/org-mode/lisp after the first build then I do get errors.
> Do you mean that it happens on each update?
Yes. However, there was a time several months ago when I needed only
build org-mode once to update it successfully. Something then changed in
org-mode such that initially updated .elc files caused an error. I
subsequently discovered that if a went through the build process twice,
removing the .elc files after the first build, they would be accepted at
the second build.
> No .elc files should
> survive "make clean". I have not tried to reproduce it accordingly
> to your steps, but I have seen something strange related to .el
> and .elc files while experimenting with package.el.
> https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-build-system.html#orgd21575b
> "Compatibility and Convenience" and
>
https://orgmode.org/worg/org-faq.html#keeping-current-with-Org-mode-development
> suggests that
> make uncompiled
> may be a shorter path to the same point.
> However accordingly to your description I expect that you do not
> have Org loaded yet. If you can not load compiled org now it
> should cause an error after emacs restart as well.
Org-mode is already loaded, that is the git version of org that I am about to
update is already loaded. If I C-j
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(car (assoc "/org-loaddefs.el" load-history (lambda (a b)
(string-match-p b a))))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
in a scratch buffer then I get "~/git/org-mode/lisp/org-loaddefs.el". I
update org-mode during a normal emacs session that may have run over
one or two days, during which time I will have used org-agenda, clocked
in and out of various times and perhaps used org-export.
Best wishes,
Colin.
- Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Colin Baxter, 2023/04/21
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Max Nikulin, 2023/04/21
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Colin Baxter, 2023/04/21
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Max Nikulin, 2023/04/21
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, William Denton, 2023/04/21
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Colin Baxter, 2023/04/21
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Colin Baxter, 2023/04/21
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Max Nikulin, 2023/04/21
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Colin Baxter, 2023/04/22
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Max Nikulin, 2023/04/22
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?,
Colin Baxter <=
- Re: Why am I being told to use "straight.el"?, Max Nikulin, 2023/04/24