Re: missing devel pkgs for emacs build

[Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com>]

Tom Furie <tom@furie.org.uk> writes:

> On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 12:35:39PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
>
>> One thing should be mentioned... I've allowed my debian system to fall
>> badly behind in updates and general maintenance.  Now face a bit of a
>> job getting back on track.  But doubt that is the cause of my troubles.
>
> What version of Debian are you on?

Much of what I mentioned about falling behind has been corrected in
the course of this problem.

jessie

[...]

> Shouldn't be relevant, but is that --prefix path really where you want
> to install emacs to? Also, while it usually works it's not normally
> recommended to build in a sub-dir of the source tree, a better option
> would be for example if your source tree is at src/emacs/trunk to build
> in src/emacs/build.

Yes that is the path I've set.

My setup looks like:

/usr/local/src/vcs/bzr/emacs/trunk
                  /bzr/test/bin
      ...             /test/libexec
      ...             /test/share
      ...             /test/var       

Ditto for cvs, git, mercurial

When I created the bzr setup the download does not include such a
scheme as you suggest.  I've always run the build commands from the
level with the INSTALL file.  In my bzr download that is located in
'trunk'

It appears to be where devs expect one to build from.  It has INSTALL,
INSTALL.BZR, autogen.sh, configure  etc etc.

About your build comments:

You aren't suggesting the setup I have is the cause of my troubles
right?

I ask because for over 15 yrs I've built emacs in this way or
something very similar... that is, I've never followed the
prescription you laid out.  I don't mean I've built it frequently but
probably over 30+ or so times at least.

Acquire sources (which used to be from cvs and didn't involve the
'trunk' directory), cd to top level, or now to level with the build
tools present (trunk)  and run my commands.

Or something very similar but using the uncompressed tarball.

I don't claim its right or even good.  It's just that I've never had
anyone report that it was a poor choice of setup.

Can you say what is better about the scheme you suggest?

Anyway, its worked for years.  Again not this precise setup... its
only about 3yrs old but before it was similar... just the --prefix was
different.

I just create the necessary symlinks to make the paths simpler if
necessary.  But once in place its not a problem.

And for emacs. a 'site-start.el' has all the relevant paths.