Re: python debugging on trunk

2022-09-26 Thread Zack Weinberg
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022, at 12:23 PM, Karl Berry wrote: > Is anyone up for debugging some Python-related test failures on > RHEL-based systems? I have access to a RHEL7 system, I know Python, and this sounds much less unpleasant than everything else I'm supposed to be doing today. > I have a

bug#58102: [PATCH] Do not use -Q when calculating Emacs site-lisp directory

2022-09-26 Thread Richard Hopkins
This change ensures consistency and compatibility for both GNU Emacs and XEmacs because: * XEmacs doesn't support -Q and ignores it; and * the different releases of GNU Emacs handle it differently, or not at all. With GNU Emacs, '-Q' was added in 22.1, and specifying it on earlier versions

bug#58025: [PATCH] Ensure `byte-compile-dest-file-function' is used

2022-09-26 Thread Karl Berry
Hi Richard - I installed the -l bytecomp patch you sent (copied below). It seems safe, and good in any case. Thanks. If there are changes to make in the -Q / -q area, let's address those separately. (I'll close this bug, I guess, but fine to keep discussing wherever.) I don't think Automake uses

bug#58026: [PATCH] Emacs .elc byte compilation now respects silent rules

2022-09-26 Thread Karl Berry
Emacs byte compilation now respects silent build rules (e.g. make V=0). i.e. use AM_V_GEN to show this instead GEN bar.elc Thanks. I applied the patch.

python debugging on trunk

2022-09-26 Thread Karl Berry
Is anyone up for debugging some Python-related test failures on RHEL-based systems? Mike Vapier from gentoo made many improvements to the Python support. (Mike, if you're still out there, would love to hear back.) Unfortunately, the end result is that 13 tests (listed below) now fail for me on

bug#58025: [PATCH] Ensure `byte-compile-dest-file-function' is used

2022-09-26 Thread Zack Weinberg
On Sat, Sep 24, 2022, at 5:45 AM, Richard Hopkins wrote: > On 2022-09-23 16:15, Zack Weinberg wrote: >> Thank you for the patch. Are you able to test it with a version of >> GNU Emacs older than 23.2? I see that you tested it with XEmacs 21, >> but as I recall there were quite substantial