From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Schmitt Subject: Re: bug with :wrap when exporting Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 18:52:26 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87eh5suu62.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41312) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vod6J-0003ZF-2S for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 12:52:41 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vod6D-0004Gc-2T for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 12:52:35 -0500 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.83]:45306) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vod6C-0004GN-S6 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 12:52:28 -0500 In-reply-to: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Nicolas Goaziou Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org writes: > I'd gladly test it, but I'm not sure how to do it. I understand I need > to switch branch to the maint branch on my git clone of the repository. > But then what is the simplest way to test this different org version > without changing my current installation? Should I simply launch "emacs > -Q" the evaluate something like: > > (add-to-list 'load-path "~/src/org-mode/lisp") > (require 'org) I tried to do this, and do a "make clean" to make sure old elc files would not be picked up, but then export fails with Symbol's function definition is void: org-export-dispatch In fact it tells me more than this: I later get Org-mode version 8.2.3c (release_8.2.3c-20-gaf6f14.dirty-git @ mixed installation! /usr/local/Cellar/emacs-mac/emacs-24.3-mac-4.5/share/emacs/24.3/lisp/org/ and /Users/schmitta/projets/org-mode/lisp/) Do I need to compile the org files for them to be taken into account? Thanks, Alan