GNU bug report logs - #69084
30; check-declare-directory chokes on lock files

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 69084 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 69084 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: Jonas Bernoulli <jonas <at> bernoul.li>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 30; check-declare-directory chokes on lock files
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 20:26:57 +0100

`check-declare-directory' chokes on lock files for libraries:

  check-declare-scan: Opening input file: No such file or directory,
    /home/jonas/.config/emacs/lib/forge/lisp/.#forge-pullreq.el

This simple change would take care of that:

diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el
@@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ check-declare-directory
   (setq root (directory-file-name (file-relative-name root)))
   (or (file-directory-p root)
       (error "Directory `%s' not found" root))
-  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\.el\\'")))
+  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\`[^.].*\\.el\\'")))
     (when files
       (apply #'check-declare-files files))))

I am not sure this is acceptable as it would also skip over other hidden
files.  IMO that would be okay; libraries arguably shouldn't be hidden
files.

     Cheers,
     Jonas

Message #8 received at 69084 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Jonas Bernoulli <jonas <at> bernoul.li>
Cc: 69084 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#69084: 30; check-declare-directory chokes on lock files
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 10:48:01 +0200

> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 20:26:57 +0100
> From:  Jonas Bernoulli via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> 
> `check-declare-directory' chokes on lock files for libraries:
> 
>   check-declare-scan: Opening input file: No such file or directory,
>     /home/jonas/.config/emacs/lib/forge/lisp/.#forge-pullreq.el
> 
> This simple change would take care of that:
> 
> diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el
> @@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ check-declare-directory
>    (setq root (directory-file-name (file-relative-name root)))
>    (or (file-directory-p root)
>        (error "Directory `%s' not found" root))
> -  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\.el\\'")))
> +  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\`[^.].*\\.el\\'")))
>      (when files
>        (apply #'check-declare-files files))))
> 
> I am not sure this is acceptable as it would also skip over other hidden
> files.  IMO that would be okay; libraries arguably shouldn't be hidden
> files.

Why not exempt specifically the lock files, i.e. those whose basename
begins with ".#"?  That can be done with an additional test on the
candidate file names returned by directory-files-recursively.

WDYT?

Message #11 received at 69084 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jonas Bernoulli <jonas <at> bernoul.li>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 69084 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#69084: 30; check-declare-directory chokes on lock files
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:54:47 +0100

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 20:26:57 +0100
>> From:  Jonas Bernoulli via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
>> 
>> `check-declare-directory' chokes on lock files for libraries:
>> 
>>   check-declare-scan: Opening input file: No such file or directory,
>>     /home/jonas/.config/emacs/lib/forge/lisp/.#forge-pullreq.el
>> 
>> This simple change would take care of that:
>> 
>> diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el
>> @@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ check-declare-directory
>>    (setq root (directory-file-name (file-relative-name root)))
>>    (or (file-directory-p root)
>>        (error "Directory `%s' not found" root))
>> -  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\.el\\'")))
>> +  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\`[^.].*\\.el\\'")))
>>      (when files
>>        (apply #'check-declare-files files))))
>> 
>> I am not sure this is acceptable as it would also skip over other hidden
>> files.  IMO that would be okay; libraries arguably shouldn't be hidden
>> files.
>
> Why not exempt specifically the lock files, i.e. those whose basename
> begins with ".#"?  That can be done with an additional test on the
> candidate file names returned by directory-files-recursively.
>
> WDYT?

I've gone with the approach you suggested.

Message #16 received at 69084-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
To: Jonas Bernoulli <jonas <at> bernoul.li>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 69084-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#69084: 30; check-declare-directory chokes on lock files
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 19:34:51 -0800

Jonas Bernoulli <jonas <at> bernoul.li> writes:

> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
>>> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 20:26:57 +0100
>>> From:  Jonas Bernoulli via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>>>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
>>>
>>> `check-declare-directory' chokes on lock files for libraries:
>>>
>>>   check-declare-scan: Opening input file: No such file or directory,
>>>     /home/jonas/.config/emacs/lib/forge/lisp/.#forge-pullreq.el
>>>
>>> This simple change would take care of that:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/check-declare.el
>>> @@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ check-declare-directory
>>>    (setq root (directory-file-name (file-relative-name root)))
>>>    (or (file-directory-p root)
>>>        (error "Directory `%s' not found" root))
>>> -  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\.el\\'")))
>>> +  (let ((files (directory-files-recursively root "\\`[^.].*\\.el\\'")))
>>>      (when files
>>>        (apply #'check-declare-files files))))
>>>
>>> I am not sure this is acceptable as it would also skip over other hidden
>>> files.  IMO that would be okay; libraries arguably shouldn't be hidden
>>> files.
>>
>> Why not exempt specifically the lock files, i.e. those whose basename
>> begins with ".#"?  That can be done with an additional test on the
>> candidate file names returned by directory-files-recursively.
>>
>> WDYT?
>
> I've gone with the approach you suggested.

The patch was installed, so I'm closing this bug report.

Previous Next

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