From: Harry P. <re...@ne...> - 2002-04-02 07:00:09
|
Sorry to be a pest, but I haven't been using tramp for quite so downloaded latest latest cvs, and immediately ran into trouble. This problem is occuring on a newly installed Freebsd 4.5-SNAP Running Emacs-21.2 The info file says: * Optionally byte-compile all files in the Lisp directory, `~/emacs/tramp/lisp/', by issuing a command like the following from that directory: make EMACS=emacs all # for Emacs users make EMACS=xemacs all # for XEmacs users So, all I'm supposed to do is cd to lisp and run: make EMACS=emacs all What's this cheese all about? $ make EMACS=emacs all "Makefile", line 8: Need an operator "Makefile", line 10: Need an operator make: fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue Sorry, I don't know much about Makefiles so couldn't really tell what to edit to make it work. |
From: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (K. ) - 2002-04-02 08:12:49
|
Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > The info file says: > * Optionally byte-compile all files in the Lisp directory, > `~/emacs/tramp/lisp/', by issuing a command like the following > from that directory: > make EMACS=emacs all # for Emacs users > make EMACS=xemacs all # for XEmacs users > > So, all I'm supposed to do is cd to lisp and run: > make EMACS=emacs all Actually, I think the idea is to cd to ~/emacs/tramp, not ~/emacs/tramp/lisp. Hm. Got to revisit the instructions, there. But I think that your problem is that the Makefile wants a GNU make. So try "gmake" instead of "make". I wanted to do a real Autoconf setup, but I was too lazy. And I figure that Tramp is already part of XEmacs and will be part of Emacs soon, so why bother... But I think that the Autoconf setup should be done anyway. Is anyone willing to do that? kai -- Silence is foo! |
From: Harry P. <re...@ne...> - 2002-04-03 16:32:03
|
Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > [From install section of manual] > Unchanged > ================================================== > > * Choose a directory, say `~/emacs/'. Change into that directory > and unpack the tarball. This will give you a directory > `~/emacs/tramp/' which contains subdirectories `lisp' for the > Lisp code and `texi' for the documentation. I lied, above is changed, so that it no longer says to run make in emacs/tramp/lisp |
From: Harry P. <re...@ne...> - 2002-04-03 19:50:34
|
Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > } > ## Print the captured last line and an extra newline. > print "$last_line\n\n"; > close(SOURCE_FILE); > close(TARGET_DIR_FILE); A minor fix for the script. Above neglected to print $last_line to target file and only prints to stdout ## Print the captured last line and an extra newline. print "$last_line\n\n"; print TARGET_DIR_FILE "$last_line\n\n"; close(SOURCE_FILE); close(TARGET_DIR_FILE); |
From: Harry P. <re...@ne...> - 2002-04-05 09:45:36
|
Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes: > Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > >> I read man autoconf through. It seems to be saying I should run >> `autoscan' in tramp, which generates configure.scan. I'm then told to >> look at configure.scan and `make sure its ok'. man autoconf expects >> me to know what is `ok' > > I guess that autoscan looks for C files, so it's of no use for Tramp, > which only contains *.el files. > > I was thinking that one could see something when looking at the > configure.in, Makefile.in and aclocal.m4 from Gnus. Hm. But at > least aclocal.m4 looks quite complex. Hm. Oh, well. I know it's a > difficult job. Well the good side is there is no deadline ... he he. No one has commented on the changes I suggested for info manual concerning use if install-info, so I guess I will just submit a patch and a finished script, here towmorrow. |
From: Harry P. <re...@ne...> - 2002-04-02 09:42:16
|
Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes: > Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > >> The info file says: >> * Optionally byte-compile all files in the Lisp directory, >> `~/emacs/tramp/lisp/', by issuing a command like the following >> from that directory: >> make EMACS=emacs all # for Emacs users >> make EMACS=xemacs all # for XEmacs users >> >> So, all I'm supposed to do is cd to lisp and run: >> make EMACS=emacs all > > Actually, I think the idea is to cd to ~/emacs/tramp, not > ~/emacs/tramp/lisp. Hm. Got to revisit the instructions, there. I tried that first, it gives even more errors, but then noticed that the info file says explicitly to do it from `tramp/lisp' But it was as you guessed.. It needed `gmake'. I forgot that the various bsds don't always use gnu stuff by default like linux distros do. And of course, I went ahead and byte compiled by hand, so not a serious problem in any event. > But I think that your problem is that the Makefile wants a GNU make. > So try "gmake" instead of "make". Yup.. > I wanted to do a real Autoconf setup, but I was too lazy. And I > figure that Tramp is already part of XEmacs and will be part of Emacs > soon, so why bother... But I think that the Autoconf setup should be > done anyway. Is anyone willing to do that? I could try it, but don't expect anything too soon since I will need to first learn what is required. I agree it should be done even if it becomes part of both emacs varieties, because people are still likely to use tramp cvs, and want to keep it separate. If you gave me a brief outline of what is supposed to happen (I mean generally, just from off the top of your head) I may be able to figure out the rest and get it done. That little section of the info manual does seem to indicate the `lisp' directory, but probably only fooled a few people. If I patch the small info error against the current cvs, should I just post the patch here or send it somewhere else? |
From: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (K. ) - 2002-04-02 11:29:37
|
Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > If you gave me a brief outline of what is supposed to happen (I mean > generally, just from off the top of your head) I may be able to figure > out the rest and get it done. That's great! Thanks so much for helping. If you look at the Gnus or W3 source directory, you'll see a configure script. (I'm sure you have used it.) There are various *.in files and an aclocal.m4 which are used to create the non-*.in files. To do this, run "autoconf", maybe "aclocal" first. So: create Makefile.in, configure.in and aclocal.m4, then run "aclocal", then "autoconf", and you should get Makefile and configure. I'm sure the GNU Autoconf manual has the full story, but I've not looked at it much. > That little section of the info manual does seem to indicate the `lisp' > directory, but probably only fooled a few people. If I patch the > small info error against the current cvs, should I just post the patch > here or send it somewhere else? Send patch here. Thanks! kai -- Silence is foo! |
From: Harry P. <re...@ne...> - 2002-04-03 21:25:38
|
Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes: > That's great! Thanks so much for helping. If you look at the Gnus > or W3 source directory, you'll see a configure script. (I'm sure you > have used it.) There are various *.in files and an aclocal.m4 which > are used to create the non-*.in files. To do this, run "autoconf", > maybe "aclocal" first. > > So: create Makefile.in, configure.in and aclocal.m4, then run > "aclocal", then "autoconf", and you should get Makefile and configure. > > I'm sure the GNU Autoconf manual has the full story, but I've not > looked at it much. I read man autoconf through. It seems to be saying I should run `autoscan' in tramp, which generates configure.scan. I'm then told to look at configure.scan and `make sure its ok'. man autoconf expects me to know what is `ok' Then rename configure.scan to configure.in and run autoconf. Doesn't really say I need to create aclocal or aclocal.mf, only that autoconf will use them. Seems to indicate they are part of autoconf setup and definitely has nothing I understand to say about what is in them. Looking at examples in gnus does nothing to clear it up and in fact only further confuses me. There are enough if elses in there to choke two mules. So renamed configure.scan to configure.in and run autoconf configure gets created. Run configure loading cache ./config.cache configure: error: can not find install-sh or install.sh in . ./.. ./../.. Fails, looking for install.sh. man Autoconf mentions install.sh but doesn't say I need to create it or what it should contain. At least not in normal english. As is often the case with man pages, `man autoconf' is written for someone who understands at least %75 percent of what is expected and what will happen and has experience already with the program. None of those apply to me. `man autoconf' is no more usefull to me than a surgical manual would be, were I to decide to remove someones spleen. So briefly put, I think it will waste everyones time if I have to ask lots of questions about how to do this. Its not urgently needed so maybe in the sweet bye and bye I will aquire enough experience to do it. Meantime, I'll work on something I have some experience with and might actually be helpful with. |
From: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (K. ) - 2002-04-05 09:23:26
|
Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > I read man autoconf through. It seems to be saying I should run > `autoscan' in tramp, which generates configure.scan. I'm then told to > look at configure.scan and `make sure its ok'. man autoconf expects > me to know what is `ok' I guess that autoscan looks for C files, so it's of no use for Tramp, which only contains *.el files. I was thinking that one could see something when looking at the configure.in, Makefile.in and aclocal.m4 from Gnus. Hm. But at least aclocal.m4 looks quite complex. Hm. Oh, well. I know it's a difficult job. kai -- Silence is foo! |
From: Colin M. <c.m...@al...> - 2002-04-04 05:36:41
|
Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > As is often the case with man pages, `man autoconf' is written for > someone who understands at least %75 percent of what is expected and > what will happen and has experience already with the program. In Debian, you could 'apt-get install autobook' to get more comprehensive (and maybe also comprehensible?) documentation. The autobook home is at http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobook.html, I believe. HTH, Colin |
From: Harry P. <re...@ne...> - 2002-04-04 18:00:41
|
Colin Marquardt <c.m...@al...> writes: > Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > >> As is often the case with man pages, `man autoconf' is written for >> someone who understands at least %75 percent of what is expected and >> what will happen and has experience already with the program. > > In Debian, you could 'apt-get install autobook' to get more comprehensive > (and maybe also comprehensible?) documentation. The autobook home is at > http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobook.html, I believe. That is quite the comprehensive manual indeed. But it seems to kind of side step all the stuff that has been automated in modern autoconf. Looks like a real `from scratch' approach. So I'm sure it will prove helpfull. I had hoped to see a current tutorial or the like but didn't turn one up with a few half hearted searches. My semi literate reading of `man autoconf' seems to indicate most of the work can be done by the tools autoscan autoconf. But maybe its just hopefull day dreaming. |
From: Norbert K. <nk...@vi...> - 2002-04-05 05:07:06
|
Harry Putnam <re...@ne...> writes: > Looks like a real `from scratch' approach. So I'm sure it will prove > helpfull. I had hoped to see a current tutorial or the like but > didn't turn one up with a few half hearted searches. You might want to ask Didier Verna <di...@xe...>. He does a lot of autoconf stuff for xemacs. norbert. |