Hello, forgive my ignorance on the subject: what are the (desired) semantics of elisp files?
Currently, you trip over Automake bugs when you use lisp files in subdirs (with or without subdir-objects): lisp_LISP = sub/am.el or use nobase_: nobase_lisp_LISP = sub/am.el Elias reported part of this to bug-automake in <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.automake.bugs/4772>. Now my questions: - is the elisp installation tree hierarchical, in that it is useful to have nobase_ support as above (where the files would be installed to $(lispdir)/sub/am.el and $(lispdir)/sub/am.elc)? - with the first line above, should the .elc file be compiled in sub or in the toplevel, and should the answer to this question depend on whether subdir-objects are used or not? - assuming elisp compilation generally needs to see all files in a directory (gathering from the elisp-comp script), do you think that when listing lisp files from subdirectories in lisp_LISP, would it be useful to assume they are independently compilable, or interdependent? - if interdependent, is there a way I can get emacs (and any other tool that may serve as lisp compiler) to output .elc files in subdirectories? Thanks, Ralf
