GNU bug report logs - #4440
23.1.50; Add .dx32fsl to completion-ignored-extensions

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 4440 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 4440 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
To: emacs-pretest-bug <at> gnu.org
Subject: 23.1.50; Add .dx32fsl to completion-ignored-extensions
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:36:08 +0100

Please describe exactly what actions triggered the bug
and the precise symptoms of the bug:

I am surprised to see that .dx64fsl is on completion-ignored-extensions
while .dx32fsl is not.

'.dx32fsl' is produced by 32 bit clozure-cl¹. So I'd propose to add it
to the list.

Best wishes,

Leo

Footnotes: 
¹  http://ccl.clozure.com

Message #10 received at 4440 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu <at> gmail.com>
To: Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 4440 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#4440: 23.1.50; Add .dx32fsl to completion-ignored-extensions
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 17:14:37 +0200

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 16:36, Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> I am surprised to see that .dx64fsl is on completion-ignored-extensions
> while .dx32fsl is not.
>
> '.dx32fsl' is produced by 32 bit clozure-cl¹. So I'd propose to add it
> to the list.

There is also .p32fsl and .d32fsl, similar to .p64fsl and .d64fsl? Or
aren't these two from MCL / Clozure?

    Juanma

Message #15 received at 4440 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
To: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 4440 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#4440: 23.1.50; Add .dx32fsl to completion-ignored-extensions
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:51:02 +0100

On 2009-09-15 16:14 +0100, Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 16:36, Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I am surprised to see that .dx64fsl is on completion-ignored-extensions
>> while .dx32fsl is not.
>>
>> '.dx32fsl' is produced by 32 bit clozure-cl¹. So I'd propose to add it
>> to the list.
>
> There is also .p32fsl and .d32fsl, similar to .p64fsl and .d64fsl? Or
> aren't these two from MCL / Clozure?

I don't know where those two extensions are from. I have recently
switched to CCL and realise dired displays .dx32fsl.

>
>     Juanma

-- 
Leo's Emacs uptime: 1 minute, 47 seconds

Message #22 received at 4440 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu <at> gmail.com>
To: Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 4440 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#4440: 23.1.50; Add .dx32fsl to completion-ignored-extensions
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:42:47 +0200

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 16:36, Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> I am surprised to see that .dx64fsl is on completion-ignored-extensions
> while .dx32fsl is not.
>
> '.dx32fsl' is produced by 32 bit clozure-cl¹. So I'd propose to add it
> to the list.

Apparently, OpenMCL / Clozure uses different extensions for fasl
according to target architecture:

http://ccl.clozure.com/ccl-documentation.html#building-definitions

The attached patch adds them all, though I think they're a bit too
much. Any way to know which of these are commonly used?

    Juanma



Index: lisp/bindings.el
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/emacs/emacs/lisp/bindings.el,v
retrieving revision 1.225
diff -u -2 -r1.225 bindings.el
--- lisp/bindings.el	14 Sep 2009 23:28:43 -0000	1.225
+++ lisp/bindings.el	22 Sep 2009 13:43:44 -0000
@@ -602,7 +602,10 @@
 	 ;; CMUCL
 	 ".x86f" ".sparcf"
-         ;; Other CL implementations (Allegro, LispWorks, OpenMCL)
-         ".fasl" ".ufsl" ".fsl" ".dxl" ".pfsl" ".dfsl"
-	 ".p64fsl" ".d64fsl" ".dx64fsl"
+	 ;; OpenMCL / Clozure CL
+	 ".dfsl" ".pfsl" ".d64fsl" ".p64fsl" ".lx64fsl" ".lx32fsl"
+	 ".dx64fsl" ".dx32fsl" ".fx64fsl" ".fx32fsl" ".sx64fsl"
+	 ".sx32fsl" ".wx64fsl" ".wx32fsl"
+         ;; Other CL implementations (Allegro, LispWorks)
+         ".fasl" ".ufsl" ".fsl" ".dxl"
 	 ;; Libtool
 	 ".lo" ".la"

Message #27 received at 4440 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
To: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 4440 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#4440: 23.1.50; Add .dx32fsl to completion-ignored-extensions
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:00:31 +0100

On 2009-09-25 12:42 +0100, Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 16:36, Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I am surprised to see that .dx64fsl is on completion-ignored-extensions
>> while .dx32fsl is not.
>>
>> '.dx32fsl' is produced by 32 bit clozure-cl¹. So I'd propose to add it
>> to the list.
>
> Apparently, OpenMCL / Clozure uses different extensions for fasl
> according to target architecture:
>
> http://ccl.clozure.com/ccl-documentation.html#building-definitions
>
> The attached patch adds them all, though I think they're a bit too
> much. Any way to know which of these are commonly used?
>
>     Juanma
>
> Index: lisp/bindings.el
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvsroot/emacs/emacs/lisp/bindings.el,v
> retrieving revision 1.225
> diff -u -2 -r1.225 bindings.el
> --- lisp/bindings.el	14 Sep 2009 23:28:43 -0000	1.225
> +++ lisp/bindings.el	22 Sep 2009 13:43:44 -0000
> @@ -602,7 +602,10 @@
>  	 ;; CMUCL
>  	 ".x86f" ".sparcf"
> -         ;; Other CL implementations (Allegro, LispWorks, OpenMCL)
> -         ".fasl" ".ufsl" ".fsl" ".dxl" ".pfsl" ".dfsl"
> -	 ".p64fsl" ".d64fsl" ".dx64fsl"
> +	 ;; OpenMCL / Clozure CL
> +	 ".dfsl" ".pfsl" ".d64fsl" ".p64fsl" ".lx64fsl" ".lx32fsl"
> +	 ".dx64fsl" ".dx32fsl" ".fx64fsl" ".fx32fsl" ".sx64fsl"
> +	 ".sx32fsl" ".wx64fsl" ".wx32fsl"
> +         ;; Other CL implementations (Allegro, LispWorks)
> +         ".fasl" ".ufsl" ".fsl" ".dxl"
>  	 ;; Libtool
>  	 ".lo" ".la"

Many thanks for investigating this further. Unfortunately I am not too
familiar with ccl. I changed from sbcl to ccl because threads are better
supported in ccl on OSX. Could you ask in gmane.lisp.openmcl.devel?

Leo

Message #30 received at 4440 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 4440 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Leo <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#4440: 23.1.50; Add .dx32fsl to completion-ignored-extensions
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 15:39:57 +0200

Juanma Barranquero <lekktu <at> gmail.com> writes:

> The attached patch adds them all, though I think they're a bit too
> much. Any way to know which of these are commonly used?

I've now applied your patch to Emacs 24.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.