7:28 a.m.
Hi,
downloaded sources from new bitbucket archive, which went fine.
Thanks a lot!
Can't see any prescription how to install from sources so far.
What about introducing an INSTALL.SOURCES containing that?
Andreas
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
2:06 p.m.
Am Montag, den 10.10.2011, 08:28 +0200 schrieb Andreas Röhler:
Hi,
downloaded sources from new bitbucket archive, which went fine.
Thanks a lot!
Can't see any prescription how to install from sources so far.
What about introducing an INSTALL.SOURCES containing that?
Andreas
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Well, I do a
./configure --with-ncurses --with-system-packages=/usr/local/lib/xemacs
--with-menubars=lucid --with-scrollbars=lucid --with-dialogs=athena
followed by 'make' and 'make install'.
--
thomas
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
3:21 p.m.
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 03:06:24PM +0200, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote:
Well, I do a
./configure --with-ncurses --with-system-packages=/usr/local/lib/xemacs
--with-menubars=lucid --with-scrollbars=lucid --with-dialogs=athena
followed by 'make' and 'make install'.
While we're at it, could you please remind me how to tell ./configure
where I want XEmacs to find packages at run time?
I'm not installing the built XEmacs, which is at:
~/emacs/xemacs.hg/xemacs.
My packages directory, also not installed is at:
~/emacs/xemacs.hg/xemacs-packages.
I've tried .... --with-system-packages=~/emacs/xemacs.hg/xemacs-packages
--with-system-packages=~/emacs/xemacs.hg
--with-package-path=~/emacs/xemacs.hg/xemacs-packages
--with-system-packages=~/emacs/xemacs.hg/
--with-system-packages=~/emacs/xemacs.hg/xemacs-packages/
--with-package-path=~/emacs/xemacs.hg/xemacs-packages/xemacs-packages
, and perhaps a few more combinations. The result is always the same -
XEmacs builds, but at runtime there is nothing in `load-path' pointing
at my packages directory.
Help, please!
--
thomas
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
6 p.m.
>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> writes:
, and perhaps a few more combinations. The result is always the same
-
XEmacs builds, but at runtime there is nothing in `load-path' pointing
at my packages directory.
Strange. This works fine for me.
--with-package-path=~/.xemacs:/src/xemacs/xemacs-packages:/src/xemacs/mule-packages:/src/xemacs/site-packages
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
8:30 p.m.
Hi, Mats.
Thanks for the reply.
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 07:00:22PM +0200, Mats Lidell wrote:
>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> writes:
> , and perhaps a few more combinations. The result is always the
same -
> XEmacs builds, but at runtime there is nothing in `load-path' pointing
> at my packages directory.
Strange. This works fine for me.
--with-package-path=~/.xemacs:/src/xemacs/xemacs-packages:/src/xemacs/mule-packages:/src/xemacs/site-packages
I think I'm sure I've made no typing mistakes. Something wierd is going
on. If this configuration element worked, what would I be seeing?
Any other suggestions?
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
6:13 a.m.
>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> writes:
I think I'm sure I've made no typing mistakes. Something
wierd is
going on. If this configuration element worked, what would I be
seeing?
Could it be that you are pointing to the location of the package
sources and not to the place of the installed packages? XEmacs needs
to find the installed packages in order to populate the load path.
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
7:32 a.m.
Mats Lidell <matsl(a)xemacs.org> writes:
>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> writes:
> I think I'm sure I've made no typing mistakes. Something wierd is
> going on. If this configuration element worked, what would I be
> seeing?
Could it be that you are pointing to the location of the package
sources and not to the place of the installed packages? XEmacs needs
to find the installed packages in order to populate the load path.
Also, the output of "xemacs -debug-paths" might help figure out what's
going on.
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
9:51 a.m.
Hi, Mats.
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 07:13:26AM +0200, Mats Lidell wrote:
>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> writes:
> I think I'm sure I've made no typing mistakes.
Something wierd is
> going on. If this configuration element worked, what would I be
> seeing?
Could it be that you are pointing to the location of the package
sources and not to the place of the installed packages? XEmacs needs to
find the installed packages in order to populate the load path.
Er, yes, that's precisely what I'm doing. This should work, surely? At
the moment, there are only .el files in these directories. Will this
prevent XEmacs from recognising the directories as `load-path'
components?
What does "install" mean? It means, primarily, that files get copied to
/usr/local/share/.... So why would /usr/local/share/.... work, but my
source directory not? I'll try compiling all the packages and see if
that makes a difference.
Yours
--
%% Mats
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
1:29 p.m.
Am 11.10.2011 08:32, schrieb Michael Sperber:
Hi,
thanks again for setting up the repo.
Think it might be good, if people find some prescript how to set up an
XEmacs from it's sources.
So far that seems the next logical step making your work pay...
Cheers,
Andreas
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
2:56 p.m.
>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> writes:
Er, yes, that's precisely what I'm doing. This should work,
surely?
I'm afraid not. The layout of the installed packages, that XEmacs is
looking for, is not the same as the layout for the package sources.
At the moment, there are only .el files in these directories. Will
this prevent XEmacs from recognising the directories as `load-path'
components?
No it is not that the elc-files are missing. As I get it there is no
way that the sources can be used directly the way you are trying. (But
this is Lisp so there might be some magic I have missed. Have been
byte compiling the sources to long for thinking of any alternatives
;-)
What does "install" mean? It means, primarily, that files
get copied to
/usr/local/share/.... So why would /usr/local/share/.... work, but my
source directory not? I'll try compiling all the packages and see if
that makes a difference.
Install mean that the packages are byte compiled and installed in
another location than the sources. The file "Local.rules" controls the
details. Read the "INSTALL" file in the root of the package sources
for how to configure the build.
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
3:55 p.m.
Hi, Mats.
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 03:56:03PM +0200, Mats Lidell wrote:
>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> writes:
> Er, yes, that's precisely what I'm doing. This should
work, surely?
I'm afraid not. The layout of the installed packages, that XEmacs
is
looking for, is not the same as the layout for the package sources.
<sigh>
> At the moment, there are only .el files in these directories.
Will
> this prevent XEmacs from recognising the directories as `load-path'
> components?
No it is not that the elc-files are missing. As I get it there is no
way that the sources can be used directly the way you are trying. (But
this is Lisp so there might be some magic I have missed. Have been
byte compiling the sources to long for thinking of any alternatives
;-)
> What does "install" mean? It means, primarily, that
files get copied to
> /usr/local/share/.... So why would /usr/local/share/.... work, but my
> source directory not? I'll try compiling all the packages and see if
> that makes a difference.
Install mean that the packages are byte compiled and installed in
another location than the sources. The file "Local.rules" controls the
details. Read the "INSTALL" file in the root of the package sources
for how to configure the build.
I'm part way there. I'm getting an error [2] from make. I'll get it
sorted out sometime.
Presumably after each little change to my (package-)source code, I'll
need to do a 'make install' to test it. Or would it be better to put the
source code directly under the install directory?
This is a real time sink, for both of us. Thanks for the help.
Yours
--
%% Mats
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
4:57 p.m.
Hi Alan,
>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> writes:
Presumably after each little change to my (package-)source code,
I'll need to do a 'make install' to test it. Or would it be better
to put the source code directly under the install directory?
No. Just do "make install" and let make put the packages where you
have chosen in your Local.rules file.
XEMACS_INSTALLED_PACKAGES_ROOT=...
(This should be in harmony with the --with-package-path that you used
for building your XEmacs binary.)
My setup (and the recommend way to do it according to Local.rules)
Building xemacs binary:
--prefix=/src/xemacs
--with-package-path=~/.xemacs:/src/xemacs/xemacs-packages:/src/xemacs/mule-packages:/src/xemacs/site-packages
Building xemacs packages
sources located at: /src/xemacs/packages
In Local.rules: XEMACS_INSTALLED_PACKAGES_ROOT = ${XEMACS_PACKAGES_BASE}/..
There is a description in the Local.rules file that describes this
above in detail.
I use this approach so the installation is it's own copy and not
depending on what I might pull into the sources. This way your
packages will not be destroyed by some package that won't
compile. (Which might happen if you symlink to the sources.)
This is a real time sink, for both of us. Thanks for the help.
Nah. Glad to help and it is fun to compile the packages ;-) It takes
some time though. That is the reason for the existence of the prebuilt
packages and the sumu!
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
8:28 p.m.
Hi, Mats
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 05:57:19PM +0200, Mats Lidell wrote:
Hi Alan,
>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> writes:
> Presumably after each little change to my (package-)source
code,
> I'll need to do a 'make install' to test it. Or would it be better
> to put the source code directly under the install directory?
No. Just do "make install" and let make put the packages
where you
have chosen in your Local.rules file.
OK. I've got my Local.rules file set up. I did it first by building the
packages (which takes long enough), then experimenting with XEmacs
./configure settings until something worked. This seems a bit backwards,
but it worked.
My setup (and the recommend way to do it according to Local.rules)
Building xemacs binary:
--prefix=/src/xemacs
--with-package-path=~/.xemacs:/src/xemacs/xemacs-packages:/src/xemacs/mule-packages:/src/xemacs/site-packages
Building xemacs packages
sources located at: /src/xemacs/packages
In Local.rules: XEMACS_INSTALLED_PACKAGES_ROOT = ${XEMACS_PACKAGES_BASE}/..
Does that really mean a /src directory at the top level of the file
system?
I put ~/emacs/xemacs.hg/xemacs-packages.elc into
XEMACS_INSTALLED_PACKAGES_ROOT, but I had to go one level down when
specifying --with-package-path=... in the ./configure file.
There is a description in the Local.rules file that describes this
above in detail.
I use this approach so the installation is it's own copy and not
depending on what I might pull into the sources. This way your
packages will not be destroyed by some package that won't
compile. (Which might happen if you symlink to the sources.)
> This is a real time sink, for both of us. Thanks for the help.
Nah. Glad to help and it is fun to compile the packages ;-) It takes
some time though. That is the reason for the existence of the prebuilt
packages and the sumu!
Ah well, I've got it now. Now to get on with the real work. ;-)
Yours
--
%% Mats
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
9:47 p.m.
Hi Alan
You wrote:
Does that really mean a /src directory at the top level of the file
system?
Yes.
I put ~/emacs/xemacs.hg/xemacs-packages.elc into
XEMACS_INSTALLED_PACKAGES_ROOT, but I had to go one level down when
specifying --with-package-path=... in the ./configure file.
I'm sorry but I don't understand this but...
Ah well, I've got it now. Now to get on with the real work. ;-)
... since you got it working, Great. Good luck!
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:03 a.m.
Andreas Röhler writes:
downloaded sources from new bitbucket archive, which went fine.
Thanks a lot!
Can't see any prescription how to install from sources so far.
Just like curing the cold, it's as simple as "Take two aspirin and
call me in the morning."
What about introducing an INSTALL.SOURCES containing that?
If you think you need it, you're probably thinking too much. It's
just
./configure --prefix=$PREFIX --with-system-packages=$PATH_TO_INSTALLED_PACKAGES
make
make install # you may need su or sudo
--prefix may be omitted if the default of /usr/local is appropriate,
and --with-system-packages may be omitted if the default of
$prefix/share/xemacs is appropriate. ($PATH_TO_INSTALLED_PACKAGES
should contain xemacs-packages and possibly mule-packages and/or
site-packages.)
The only tricky thing about it is that the packages *must* be in
installed format (there is a way to create a symlink farm instead of
physical copies, but I don't know if that really makes sense); you
can't use packages in the source tree. (This is admittedly stupid,
but only Mike knows enough about the package system to do something
about it in the near future and he doesn't seem interested.) The
easiest way to install packages is
cd /tmp
# NOTE NOTE NOTE: the host is FTP.xemacs.org, not WWW.xemacs.org
# There's also a .bz2 which saves about 25% bandwidth.
wget http://ftp.xemacs.org/packages/xemacs-sumo.tar.gz
cd $PATH_TO_INSTALLED_PACKAGES
tar xzf /tmp/xemacs-sumo.tar.gz
To work on packages you do need a package source tree, of course. But
that's a different thread.
All of this is documented in excruciating detail in man/beta.texi, or
if you have a working Info reader, you can cd to man, do make
beta.info, and read it more pleasantly.
No, I see no point in adding more documentation. beta.texi is the
appropriate place, this *is* a beta distribution. The next public
release of XEmacs *will* build and install with the above
instructions, and the various feature options are documented in
./configure --help. I also hope to make package bootstrapping somewhat
more self-contained (but that's a different thread, too).
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:55 a.m.
>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
(there is a way to create a symlink farm instead of physical copies,
but I don't know if that really makes sense);
I tried that years ago but came to the conclusion that install with
copy often is you friend. This works as a firewall for strange
compilation errors in the packages. If you symlink a bad package can
spoil your day by making the package tree unusable. Sometime a make
distclean is needed and you lost your packages again for some
hours. etc. YMMW of course.
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
7:55 a.m.
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
The only tricky thing about it is that the packages *must* be in
installed format (there is a way to create a symlink farm instead of
physical copies, but I don't know if that really makes sense); you
can't use packages in the source tree. (This is admittedly stupid,
but only Mike knows enough about the package system to do something
about it in the near future and he doesn't seem interested.) The
easiest way to install packages is
It just never occurred to me, as running-only-from-installed was deeply
built into the package system from the start. But it shouldn't be hard
to do - the trick is probably finding out whether you're looking at a
source hierarchy or an installed hierarchy: I'll put it on my list.
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
8:36 a.m.
Michael Sperber writes:
It just never occurred to me, as running-only-from-installed was
deeply
built into the package system from the start.
Yeah, that was Steve Baur. I don't know why he thought that was
important. It *is* important (eg, to me) to have a single installed
package tree that has its own root, independent of the Emacs root for
the core code. But I never had a good idea why that also implied no
running in place for the packages.
But it shouldn't be hard to do - the trick is probably finding
out
whether you're looking at a source hierarchy or an installed
hierarchy: I'll put it on my list.
It's not dead simple, I suspect, because some packages have a very
flat organization, and others have multiple levels of subtree. This
information *is* available to the build code though, so it should be
possible to dig it out. But it probably should be refactored.
Also, it would be nice if the stat'ing of the load-path could be
optimized further (David Kastrup offered a couple of ideas way back
when). But this only needs to apply to the installed packages IMO.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
8:50 a.m.
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Michael Sperber writes:
> It just never occurred to me, as running-only-from-installed was deeply
> built into the package system from the start.
Yeah, that was Steve Baur. I don't know why he thought that was
important. It *is* important (eg, to me) to have a single installed
package tree that has its own root, independent of the Emacs root for
the core code. But I never had a good idea why that also implied no
running in place for the packages.
> But it shouldn't be hard to do - the trick is probably finding out
> whether you're looking at a source hierarchy or an installed
> hierarchy: I'll put it on my list.
It's not dead simple, I suspect, because some packages have a very
flat organization, and others have multiple levels of subtree. This
information *is* available to the build code though, so it should be
possible to dig it out. But it probably should be refactored.
Yeah, but the whole path-searching code was built without a fixed
assumption as to tree depth, so I believe it can cope. If you can
define the tree layout, you can also get the paths.
Also, it would be nice if the stat'ing of the load-path could be
optimized further (David Kastrup offered a couple of ideas way back
when).
Do you have a pointer? Back then, I did quite a bit of work on that
aspect, and I couldn't any way to do with less.
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:34 a.m.
Michael Sperber writes:
> Also, it would be nice if the stat'ing of the load-path
could be
> optimized further (David Kastrup offered a couple of ideas way back
> when).
Do you have a pointer? Back then, I did quite a bit of work on that
aspect, and I couldn't any way to do with less.
Not offhand, I'll try to dig it up.
IIRC, the main idea was to have an enhanced auto-autoloads in
.../xemacs-packages that would serve to fix up load-path as well, thus
avoiding all the stat'ing down into the tree.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:55 a.m.
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Michael Sperber writes:
> > Also, it would be nice if the stat'ing of the load-path could be
> > optimized further (David Kastrup offered a couple of ideas way back
> > when).
>
> Do you have a pointer? Back then, I did quite a bit of work on that
> aspect, and I couldn't any way to do with less.
Not offhand, I'll try to dig it up.
IIRC, the main idea was to have an enhanced auto-autoloads in
.../xemacs-packages that would serve to fix up load-path as well, thus
avoiding all the stat'ing down into the tree.
We discussed caching the load-path way back; I really dislike that idea,
and see even more bug reports coming because that cache is out of
synch. Is there really still that much of a problem?
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
6:12 p.m.
Michael Sperber writes:
We discussed caching the load-path way back; I really dislike that
idea,
and see even more bug reports coming because that cache is out of
synch. Is there really still that much of a problem?
Problem, I don't know. Very noticable, yes. xemacs --no-packages (or
whatever it is) is fast enough to be a serious competitor to nano.
xemacs -vanilla takes long enough that I'm probably out of nano and
have restarted the daemon whose config I just frobbed before xemacs
gets a window up. Obviously this only matters because I don't leave a
root shell logged in once I'm done.
The really annoying time-waster is font-locking the files loaded by
desktop.el, of course.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
4577
days inactive
4580
days old
21 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Alan Mackenzie -
Andreas Röhler -
Michael Sperber -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
The XEmacs Package Smoketest -
Thomas Mittelstaedt