Below update is after I updated to the latest org master: On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 10:53 PM Kyle Meyer wrote: > Ah, right ... 'make compile' uses a single Emacs instance, while 'make > single' uses a separate Emacs instance for each file. > I wasn't even doing that. I was doing M-x byte-compile-file and selecting org.el. That gives me (without applying your patch): Compiling file /home/kmodi/stow/pub_dotfiles/emacs/dot-emacs.d/elisp/org-mode/lisp/org.el at Fri May 26 14:04:52 2017 In org-goto-map: org.el:7412:9:Warning: function org-goto-map used to take 0+ arguments, now takes 0 In org-todo: org.el:12398:12:Warning: function org-todo used to take 0+ arguments, now takes 0-1 In org-store-log-note: org.el:13635:8:Warning: function org-store-log-note used to take 0+ arguments, now takes 0 In org-at-timestamp-p: org.el:17909:40:Warning: reference to free variable ‘org-agenda-include-inactive-timestamps’ In org-self-insert-command: org.el:19910:32:Warning: function org-self-insert-command used to take 0+ arguments, now takes 1 With 'make single' on master, I get a compile error due to the > eval-when-compile's added in 53ee147f4 (Add support for new switches to > org-get-heading, 2017-01-17) and 6dc6eb3b0 (Fix failing test, > 2017-01-19). > In toplevel form: > org.el:7914:51:Error: Symbol’s value as variable is void: > org-comment-string > I get that too. > Your patch is only the appropriate fix if we're confident that > org-agenda will be loaded at the time that the > org-agenda-include-inactive-timestamps code path of org-at-timestamp-p > is executed. Otherwise, we're just silencing a warning about a possible > run-time void variable error. Have you looked this? No, I didn't.. your bound-and-true-p patch makes more sense. So.. should we consider the warnings output by simple byte-compile-file? Even if not, the warnings do not make sense.. just taking this example: In org-goto-map: org.el:7412:9:Warning: function org-goto-map used to take 0+ arguments, now takes 0 Nowhere is org-goto-map defined to take 0+ arguments (meaning have "&optional arg" as signature) and then redefined to have 0 arguments (which is the actual case). Wondering why the compiler thinks that. I had a quick look at byte-compile-arglist-warn function that outputs this warning.. but couldn't understand the logic for sig1 in there. -- Kaushal Modi