On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 02:34:35AM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > On 2013-11-21 01:49, Peter S Galbraith wrote: > > You are byte-compiling packages under emacs22, which is not part of any > > current Debian distribution and hasn't been since... lenny? > > exactly :-) > > > Seems to me that the upgrade from 'lenny' to 'squeeze' to 'wheezy' to > > 'jessie' should uninstall emacs22 along the way and update it to > > emacs23? > > As long as there is nothing providing a transitional package or adds a > Breaks against ancient emacs versions they will linger around ... ready > to create trouble today :-) - Thats the entire point of doing these > upgrade tests from ancient versions. > And so far I haven't gotten around starting from etch :-) > > > Otherwise, I will add checks for emacs22 and skip installation for that > > flavour. > > >> I'm also attaching the install emacs logfile, but this does not show > >> an obvious failure. > > > > It shows markdown-mode failing... I could only skip markdown-mode for > > emacs22, but honestly I haven't tested the other files on emacs22 > > either. > > I don't really care which solution you choose, I'm not using any of > these emacs things ... > > Having seen quite some of these bugs in piuparts tests so far, I'd > probably vote for letting emacs23 and emacs24 > Breaks: emacs22, emacs21, ...
People may want to have those old packages installed, even if they need to rebuild the package with some tweaks. Emacs developers often do. I personally prefer the other way, skip emacs-goodies byte-compilation for old unsupported flavours, making sure old byte-compiled stuff is removed. Regards, -- Agustin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-emacsen-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131121105431.ga6...@agmartin.aq.upm.es
