Re: Variable names of package hierarchies
- First Post
- Replies
- Stats
-
Go to
- ----- 2024 -----
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2023 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2022 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2020 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2019 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2018 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2017 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2016 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2015 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2014 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2013 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2012 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2011 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2010 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2009 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2008 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2007 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2006 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2005 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2004 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2003 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2002 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2001 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2000 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1999 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1998 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
* Michael Sperber (2006-01-30) writes:
Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)iwi.uni-sb.de> writes:
> But isn't using {early,late,last}-packages more robust than using
> `config-value'?
By definition, all the "paths" in the system are wrong for
auto-determining where to install, because they're, well, paths, not
directories.
AUCTeX appends names of potential subdirectories to these paths in
order to get absolute directory names.
At best, they make good choices to display in a menu for
the user to select. In any case, given the present infrastructure, I
believe the user does have to make an explicit decision about where to
install.
The stuff is used in AUCTeX's configure script, so there is nothing
like a menu. However, if AUCTeX doesn't find a suitable directory,
the user may specify one explicitely by means of the configure option
--with-packagedir.
(I'm sorry changing those names broke what you're doing in
AUCTeX---I
did grep through the entire package hierarchy for any possible
clients, and at the time, nobody was using it.)
You won't find anything now either because the AUCTeX package in
XEmacs does not include its build procedures.
--
Ralf
Michael Sperber
Monday, 30 January
Mon, 30 Jan
8:17 p.m.
New subject: Variable names of package hierarchies
Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)iwi.uni-sb.de> writes:
AUCTeX appends names of potential subdirectories to these paths in
order to get absolute directory names.
I know; I'm saying that's a bad strategy. (Through none of your
fault---if anyone's, it's mine, as I've been aware of the issue for
years, but always got tangled up in other issues of the path-searching
subsystem.)
The stuff is used in AUCTeX's configure script, so there is
nothing
like a menu. However, if AUCTeX doesn't find a suitable directory,
the user may specify one explicitely by means of the configure option
--with-packagedir.
For the time being, my recommendation is to require this option
always.
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
Ralf Angeli
Monday, 30 January
Mon, 30 Jan
8:13 p.m.
New subject: Variable names of package hierarchies
* Michael Sperber (2006-01-30) writes:
Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)iwi.uni-sb.de> writes:
> The stuff is used in AUCTeX's configure script, so there is nothing
> like a menu. However, if AUCTeX doesn't find a suitable directory,
> the user may specify one explicitely by means of the configure option
> --with-packagedir.
For the time being, my recommendation is to require this option
always.
Well, it's not like the computer explodes if the automatic tests fail.
If they do, the user can always use the configure option and if they
don't, they usually find a sane location.
--
Ralf
Michael Sperber
Tuesday, 31 January
Tue, 31 Jan
7:30 a.m.
New subject: Variable names of package hierarchies
Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)iwi.uni-sb.de> writes:
* Michael Sperber (2006-01-30) writes:
> Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)iwi.uni-sb.de> writes:
>
>> The stuff is used in AUCTeX's configure script, so there is nothing
>> like a menu. However, if AUCTeX doesn't find a suitable directory,
>> the user may specify one explicitely by means of the configure option
>> --with-packagedir.
>
> For the time being, my recommendation is to require this option
> always.
Well, it's not like the computer explodes if the automatic tests fail.
If they do, the user can always use the configure option and if they
don't, they usually find a sane location.
But weren't you, at the beginning of this thread, noting that the
computer indeed did explode for you? :-) (Or, rather, the software
equivalent of it.)
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
Ralf Angeli
Tuesday, 31 January
Tue, 31 Jan
9:17 a.m.
New subject: Variable names of package hierarchies
* Michael Sperber (2006-01-31) writes:
Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)iwi.uni-sb.de> writes:
> Well, it's not like the computer explodes if the automatic tests fail.
> If they do, the user can always use the configure option and if they
> don't, they usually find a sane location.
But weren't you, at the beginning of this thread, noting that the
computer indeed did explode for you? :-) (Or, rather, the software
equivalent of it.)
The user who identified the bug was at least still able to report it
via its computer. So unless he had a backup machine it's probably not
that severe. (c: Anyway, the automatic tests are really only used if
you don't specify --with-packagedir and therefore can only fail in
this case. Sorry for not making this clear beforehand.
--
Ralf
6870
days inactive
6871
days old
4 comments
2 participants
tags (0)
participants (2)
-
Michael Sperber -
Ralf Angeli