GNU bug report logs - #43475
feature/native-comp; add a site-lisp path to comp-eln-load-path

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 43475 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 43475 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: Tom Gillespie <tgbugs <at> gmail.com>
To: Emacs Bug Report <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>, Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Cc: ulm <at> gentoo.org
Subject: feature/native-comp; add a site-lisp path to comp-eln-load-path
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:37:04 -0400

Hi Andrea,
    Sorry for the delay getting this submitted. Here is a summary of the
discussion about how to handle the site-lisp equivalent for eln files. Best!
Tom

Use case. We need a default convention for where eln files compile from
files in /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp can be installed by a package manager.
For the record, https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/16962 was the start
of these discussions and the following devel thread is also relevant
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2020-08/msg01036.html.

My suggestion to use /usr/share was incorrect as Ulrich points out since
/usr/share should never contain arch specific files. Thus, ${libdir}
is the right base.

Suggestions from the previous discussion are /usr/lib{,64}/emacs/site-eln and
/usr/lib{,64}/emacs/site-lisp/eln.

If we want to mirror the way native-lisp is used for the system files
then ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp and ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/native-lisp
are two other options.

I'm not sure the intervening native-lisp folder is necessary,
especially given that
there is the additional folder that is present for each version, and
since the fact
that we are in ${libdir}/emacs automatically suggests that we are dealing with
native arch specific files. However, I suppose that there might be some future
case where something other than the native-lisp files would be included in
${libdir}/emacs, so separating the eln files in their own folder would
help. I have
no idea how likely that happening in the future is though.

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

From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
To: Tom Gillespie <tgbugs <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Emacs Bug Report <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>, ulm <at> gentoo.org
Subject: Re: feature/native-comp; add a site-lisp path to comp-eln-load-path
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 19:09:03 +0000

Hi Tom,

thanks for raising this.

Tom Gillespie <tgbugs <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Andrea,
>     Sorry for the delay getting this submitted. Here is a summary of the
> discussion about how to handle the site-lisp equivalent for eln files. Best!
> Tom
>
> Use case. We need a default convention for where eln files compile from
> files in /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp can be installed by a package manager.
> For the record, https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/16962 was the start
> of these discussions and the following devel thread is also relevant
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2020-08/msg01036.html.
>
> My suggestion to use /usr/share was incorrect as Ulrich points out since
> /usr/share should never contain arch specific files. Thus, ${libdir}
> is the right base.
>
> Suggestions from the previous discussion are /usr/lib{,64}/emacs/site-eln and
> /usr/lib{,64}/emacs/site-lisp/eln.
>
> If we want to mirror the way native-lisp is used for the system files
> then ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp and ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/native-lisp
> are two other options.

I think ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/native-lisp would be probably more
future proof but I've no strong preference.

Ulrich what would be your suggestion for this?

Thanks

  Andrea

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

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm <at> gentoo.org>
To: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Cc: Tom Gillespie <tgbugs <at> gmail.com>, Emacs Bug Report <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: feature/native-comp; add a site-lisp path to comp-eln-load-path
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:12:20 +0200

>>>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2020, Andrea Corallo wrote:

> Tom Gillespie <tgbugs <at> gmail.com> writes:

>> Suggestions from the previous discussion are
>> /usr/lib{,64}/emacs/site-eln and /usr/lib{,64}/emacs/site-lisp/eln.
>> 
>> If we want to mirror the way native-lisp is used for the system files
>> then ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp and ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/native-lisp
>> are two other options.

> I think ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/native-lisp would be probably more
> future proof but I've no strong preference.

> Ulrich what would be your suggestion for this?

I'd prefer the shorter path. I believe it's very unlikely that there
could be other files in future that would be both lisp and architecture
dependent, i.e. that would be installed in ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/
as well. In other words, the additional subdirectory level would be
totally redundant.

So, my suggestion would be either ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/ or
${libdir}/emacs/site-eln/ with a slight preference for the second.

(Note that Gentoo would create another subdirectory when installing an
add-on elisp package, so the path would be (for example)
${libdir}/emacs/site-eln/${package_name}/.)

Message #16 received at 43475-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrea Corallo <acorallo <at> gnu.org>
To: Ulrich Mueller <ulm <at> gentoo.org>
Cc: tgbugs <at> gmail.com, 43475-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Subject: Re: bug#43475: feature/native-comp; add a site-lisp path to
 comp-eln-load-path
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 04:54:10 -0400

Ulrich Mueller <ulm <at> gentoo.org> writes:

>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2020, Andrea Corallo wrote:
>
>> Tom Gillespie <tgbugs <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> Suggestions from the previous discussion are
>>> /usr/lib{,64}/emacs/site-eln and /usr/lib{,64}/emacs/site-lisp/eln.
>>> 
>>> If we want to mirror the way native-lisp is used for the system files
>>> then ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp and ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/native-lisp
>>> are two other options.
>
>> I think ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/native-lisp would be probably more
>> future proof but I've no strong preference.
>
>> Ulrich what would be your suggestion for this?
>
> I'd prefer the shorter path. I believe it's very unlikely that there
> could be other files in future that would be both lisp and architecture
> dependent, i.e. that would be installed in ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/
> as well. In other words, the additional subdirectory level would be
> totally redundant.
>
> So, my suggestion would be either ${libdir}/emacs/site-lisp/ or
> ${libdir}/emacs/site-eln/ with a slight preference for the second.
>
> (Note that Gentoo would create another subdirectory when installing an
> add-on elisp package, so the path would be (for example)
> ${libdir}/emacs/site-eln/${package_name}/.)

Closing this very old bug still related to feature/native-comp as I
think ATM the interface we provide satisfies distro needs.  Happy to
reopen if more work is needed in this area.

Best Regards

  Andrea

Previous Next

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