Description of problem:When invoked, emacs issues error message "Cannot open load file: No such file or directory, comp" and stops. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):emacs28.1-8 How reproducible:Simply update to latest version of Fedora 36 and issue command "emacs". Steps to Reproduce: 1.dnf upgrade (in Fedora 36) 2.emacs (with or without file name) Actual results:Error message "Cannot open load file: No such file or directory, comp" and emacs stops. Expected results:Normal start of emacs. Additional info:The problem is avoided by issuing the command "dnf downgrade emacs", which restores emacs27.2
I have emacs-28.1-2.fc36 . There is no emacs28.1-8 . Emacs starts with option "--no-site-lisp". There exists a file /usr/share/emacs/28.1/lisp/emacs-lisp/comp.elc , but I'm unsure why it isn't found. /usr/share/emacs/28.1/lisp/emacs-lisp is in variable load-path. Maintainers, please fix the problem, because emacs is not really usable without site-lisp extensions.
Is this still an issue with Emacs 28.2? And can you reproduce this issue with `emacs -Q`?
It seams that the cause is not in emacs itself, but in other packages that provide additional emacs modes. I have removed packages emacs-common-ddskk and emacs-ddskk. See bug 2109358. This problem still exists – if I install these packages, emacs didn't start. I have removed (or not installed) the following packages on Fedora 36 and 37 which caused me problems with emacs: emacs-ansible-vault-mode emacs-*ddskk emacs-*proofgeneral emacs-slime emacs-common-ess emacs-ess emacs-transient uim* Without these packages both emacs versions 28.1-2 and 28.2-1 works fine for me. I haven't tried to reinstall the other listed packages. I still got the warnings of bug 2155093, bug 2155095, bug 2155094.
Info: Package emacs-transient seams to be integrated in emacs-common, but it still exists in Fedora 37 repo.
I have also installed the following packages on Fedora 36 and 37 now and emacs still runs without error. emacs-ansible-vault-mode, emacs-*proofgeneral, emacs-slime, uim, uim-anthy, uim-devel, uim-gtk3, uim-m17n, uim-qt, uim-skk It also works with emacs-common-ess and emacs-ess, but then I always get the following warning (bug 2109473#c9 ): Warning (comp): /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/ess/ess-r-package.el: Error: Wrong number of arguments (3 . 4)
Could you please try with the following builds of emacs-common-ddskk if this issue is still present with it? F36: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=96837379 F37: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=96837362
(In reply to Dan Čermák from comment #6) > Could you please try with the following builds of emacs-common-ddskk if this > issue is still present with it? > F36: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=96837379 > F37: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=96837362 Thank you, Dan Cermak. I downloaded the Fedpra 37 version of emacs-common-ddskk-17.1-17.1-6.fc38.src.rpm and emacs worked well. I no longer use Fedora 36.(In reply to Dan Čermák from comment #6) > Could you please try with the following builds of emacs-common-ddskk if this > issue is still present with it? > F36: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=96837379 > F37: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=96837362
(In reply to Edgar Hoch from comment #1) > I have emacs-28.1-2.fc36 . There is no emacs28.1-8 . > > Emacs starts with option "--no-site-lisp". > > There exists a file /usr/share/emacs/28.1/lisp/emacs-lisp/comp.elc , but I'm > unsure why it isn't found. /usr/share/emacs/28.1/lisp/emacs-lisp is in > variable load-path. > > Maintainers, please fix the problem, because emacs is not really usable > without site-lisp extensions. (In reply to Dan Čermák from comment #6) > Could you please try with the following builds of emacs-common-ddskk if this > issue is still present with it? > F36: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=96837379 > F37: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=96837362
Can you please test this update as well: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-e79b4b84b4 ? It should be more or less identical to the scratch build that I posted. If it solves all the issues that you encountered, I'd say that we can then close this bug. What do you think?
(In reply to Dan Čermák from comment #9) > Can you please test this update as well: > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-e79b4b84b4 ? > > It should be more or less identical to the scratch build that I posted. If > it solves all the issues that you encountered, I'd say that we can then > close this bug. What do you think? I performed the dnf update you indicated and emacs runs well. Thank you again. I am not a systems programmer and hence cannot perform a truly thorough test of emacs. Hence closing the bug is your call. But I certainly see no reason to keep the bug open.
This message is a reminder that Fedora Linux 36 is nearing its end of life. Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora Linux 36 on 2023-05-16. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a 'version' of '36'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, change the 'version' to a later Fedora Linux version. Note that the version field may be hidden. Click the "Show advanced fields" button if you do not see it. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora Linux 36 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora Linux, you are encouraged to change the 'version' to a later version prior to this bug being closed.
Fedora Linux 36 entered end-of-life (EOL) status on 2023-05-16. Fedora Linux 36 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora Linux please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Note that the version field may be hidden. Click the "Show advanced fields" button if you do not see the version field. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against an active release. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.
The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 120 days