Hello,
forgive my ignorance on the subject: what are the (desired) semantics of
elisp files?
Currently, you trip over Automake bugs when you use lisp files in
subdirs (with or without subdir-objects):
lisp_LISP = sub/am.el
or use nobase_:
nobase_lisp_LISP = sub/am.el
Elias reported part of this to bug-automake in
<
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.automake.bugs/4772>.
Now my questions:
- is the elisp installation tree hierarchical, in that it is useful to
have nobase_ support as above (where the files would be installed to
$(lispdir)/sub/am.el and $(lispdir)/sub/am.elc)?
- with the first line above, should the .elc file be compiled in sub or
in the toplevel, and should the answer to this question depend on
whether subdir-objects are used or not?
- assuming elisp compilation generally needs to see all files in a
directory (gathering from the elisp-comp script), do you think that
when listing lisp files from subdirectories in lisp_LISP, would it be
useful to assume they are independently compilable, or interdependent?
- if interdependent, is there a way I can get emacs (and any other tool
that may serve as lisp compiler) to output .elc files in
subdirectories?
Thanks,
Ralf
