[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber
From: |
Peter Dyballa |
Subject: |
Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber |
Date: |
Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:41:19 +0200 |
Am 12.04.2008 um 18:43 schrieb Eli Zaretskii:
It used to be the case that the built binary was installed under 2
different names: `emacs' and `emacs-${version}.buildnumber', which
were both hard links to the same file. Deleting `emacs' would then
leave the other one around, and when invoked, it would want the DOC
file with the corresponding suffix. Is this no longer the case?
This is still the case.
That is, does installing a new version completely erases the old one?
Yes.
I made an experiment. Around noon I made clean and then updated from
CVS, finally made bootstrap. Since etc/DOC-23.0.60.1 was not removed
(with both src/emacs and src/emacs-23.0.60.1) I complained, because
in the weeks ago it happened that, when this DOC file survived
deletion, a new one was created with the buildnumber increased by one
either by make or by 'make bootstrap', which was then installed
together with etc/emacs-${version}.buildnumber. (The weather was so
fine and sunny that I stopped seeing a sense in deleting the file by
hand.)
After 'make bootstrap' and then 'make clean' these files existed:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root admin 2245430 7 Apr 00:42 /usr/local/share/
emacs/23.0.60/etc/DOC-23.0.60.1
-rw-r--r-- 1 pete admin 2243354 12 Apr 14:58 etc/DOC-23.0.60.1
I re-compiled with a simple make and decided to install. Then these
files existed:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root admin 2243354 12 Apr 20:07 /usr/local/share/
emacs/23.0.60/etc/DOC-23.0.60.1
-rw-r--r-- 1 pete admin 2243354 12 Apr 20:07 etc/DOC
-rw-r--r-- 1 pete admin 2243354 12 Apr 20:07 etc/DOC-23.0.60.1
That's really bad! This isn't the same I encountered before a few
times! Did someone fix the bug? Or was I doing the wrong thing? So I
decided to 'make clean' and 'make bootstrap' again. After more than
an hour these files now exist:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root admin 2243354 12 Apr 20:07 /usr/local/share/
emacs/23.0.60/etc/DOC-23.0.60.1
-rw-r--r-- 1 pete admin 2243354 12 Apr 21:29 etc/DOC
-rw-r--r-- 1 pete admin 2243354 12 Apr 21:29 etc/DOC-23.0.60.1
So it seems that the case is now solved! Although etc/DOC-$
{version}.buildnumber is left and etc/DOC is removed, it does not
happen any more that etc/DOC-${version}.<buildnumber + 1> is built,
and later potentially installed. My complaint came too late ... Sorry!
--
Greetings
Pete
For some reason, this fortune reminds everyone of Marvin Zelkowitz.
- 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Peter Dyballa, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Sven Joachim, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Sven Joachim, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Peter Dyballa, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Peter Dyballa, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/12
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Peter Dyballa, 2008/04/13
- Re: 23.0.60; etc/DOC-${version}.buildnumber, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/13