Re: emacs-w3m doesn't create Makefile (using Windows 10 64-Bit with Cygwin64)

[John Wong <thjwong@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for making the changes.

I downloaded again from the CVS fresh and tried:

% autoconf

% ./configure
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking for makeinfo... makeinfo
checking for texi2dvi... false
checking for ptex... ptex
checking for pbibtex... pbibtex
checking for dvipdfmx... dvipdfmx
checking for texi2pdf... false
checking for egrep... egrep
checking for emacs... /cygdrive/c/Program Files (x86)/GNU Emacs 24.5/bin/emacs
checking what a flavor does /cygdrive/c/Program Files (x86)/GNU Emacs 24.5/bin/emacs have... Emacs 24.5
checking prefix for /cygdrive/c/Program Files (x86)/GNU Emacs 24.5/bin/emacs... c:/Program Files (x86)/GNU Emacs 24.5
checking where lisp files should go... $(prefix)/share/emacs/site-lisp/w3m/
checking where icon files should go... $(prefix)/share/emacs/24.5/etc/images/w3m
checking for gzip... /usr/bin/gzip
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating Makefile
config.status: creating doc/Makefile

The process of ./configure went well but 'make.exe' did not go through probably with a similar origin (Windows 10 path of Emacs) of the error:

% make
env test ! -f w3m-util.elc -o w3m-util.elc -nt w3m-util.el || make clean
env test ! -f w3m-proc.elc -o w3m-proc.elc -nt w3m-proc.el || make clean
/cygdrive/c/Program Files (x86)/GNU Emacs 24.5/bin/emacs -q -no-site-file -batch -l ./w3mhack.el 'NONE' -f w3mhack-compile
/bin/sh: -c: line 0: syntax error near unexpected token `('
/bin/sh: -c: line 0: `/cygdrive/c/Program Files (x86)/GNU Emacs 24.5/bin/emacs -q -no-site-file -batch -l ./w3mhack.el 'NONE' -f w3mhack-compile'
Makefile:43: recipe for target 'lisp' failed
make: *** [lisp] Error 1

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@xxxxxxx> wrote:

In [emacs-w3m : No.12533]
        On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 15:30:29 +0900, Katsumi Yamaoka wrote:
> Try the second patch (attached).

In CVS I've installed a rearranged version of the second patch.
I'd be helped if you could verify it.  Thanks.