GNU bug report logs - #10292
following symlinks in byte-recompile-directory

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 10292 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 10292 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

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

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sam Aaron <samaaron <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: following symlinks in byte-recompile-directory
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:22:50 +0000

Hi there,

I noticed that the implementation of byte-recompile-directory has specific code to not allow symlinks to be followed. As I use symlinks to structure my ~/.emacs.d directory, this means this fn doesn't work for me. Is there any specific motivation for not having the following signature: 

(byte-recompile-directory-sl DIRECTORY &optional ARG FORCE FOLLOW-SYMLINKS)

Sam

---
http://sam.aaron.name

Message #8 received at 10292 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Sam Aaron <samaaron <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 10292 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, "Richard M. Stallman" <rms <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#10292: following symlinks in byte-recompile-directory
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 22:53:06 -0700

Sam Aaron <samaaron <at> gmail.com> writes:

> I noticed that the implementation of byte-recompile-directory has
> specific code to not allow symlinks to be followed. As I use symlinks
> to structure my ~/.emacs.d directory, this means this fn doesn't work
> for me. Is there any specific motivation for not having the following
> signature:
>
> (byte-recompile-directory-sl DIRECTORY &optional ARG FORCE FOLLOW-SYMLINKS)

(I'm going through old bug reports that unfortunately have gotten no
responses yet.)

Not following symlinks introduced in 1993, but the commit message
doesn't explain why:

commit e9681c45f9ffd2819410b763338ba58b0b892b78
Author: Richard M. Stallman <rms <at> gnu.org>
Date:   Thu Dec 23 03:37:27 1993 +0000

    (byte-compile-dest-file): If FILENAME is not recognized, append .elc to it.
    
    (byte-recompile-directory): Don't treat symlinks as dirs.
    
    (batch-byte-recompile-directory): Add autoload cookie.

Adding a parameter to the function to follow symlinks seems pretty
harmless, and seems somewhat useful, so I think it should be added.
Does anybody object to that?

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

Message #11 received at 10292 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: Sam Aaron <samaaron <at> gmail.com>, 10292 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 "Richard M. Stallman" <rms <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#10292: following symlinks in byte-recompile-directory
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 02:14:15 -0800

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> writes:

> Sam Aaron <samaaron <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I noticed that the implementation of byte-recompile-directory has
>> specific code to not allow symlinks to be followed. As I use symlinks
>> to structure my ~/.emacs.d directory, this means this fn doesn't work
>> for me. Is there any specific motivation for not having the following
>> signature:
>>
>> (byte-recompile-directory-sl DIRECTORY &optional ARG FORCE FOLLOW-SYMLINKS)
>
> (I'm going through old bug reports that unfortunately have gotten no
> responses yet.)
>
> Not following symlinks introduced in 1993, but the commit message
> doesn't explain why:
>
> commit e9681c45f9ffd2819410b763338ba58b0b892b78
> Author: Richard M. Stallman <rms <at> gnu.org>
> Date:   Thu Dec 23 03:37:27 1993 +0000
>
>     (byte-compile-dest-file): If FILENAME is not recognized, append .elc to it.
>
>     (byte-recompile-directory): Don't treat symlinks as dirs.
>
>     (batch-byte-recompile-directory): Add autoload cookie.
>
> Adding a parameter to the function to follow symlinks seems pretty
> harmless, and seems somewhat useful, so I think it should be added.

Yes, I agree.

> Does anybody object to that?

Let's assume no, since there has been no replies in the last year.  :-)

Message #14 received at 10292 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: Sam Aaron <samaaron <at> gmail.com>, 10292 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, "Richard M.
 Stallman" <rms <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#10292: following symlinks in byte-recompile-directory
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:00:52 +0100

Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se> writes:

>> Adding a parameter to the function to follow symlinks seems pretty
>> harmless, and seems somewhat useful, so I think it should be added.
>
> Yes, I agree.
>
>> Does anybody object to that?
>
> Let's assume no, since there has been no replies in the last year.  :-)

:-)

Now pushed to Emacs 28.

-- 
(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.