Re: with-package-prefix
Pekka Marjola wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 23:34 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Pema> What's the point of with-package-prefix, if ~/.xemacs cannot
> Pema> be specified with it?
>
>Allowing you to keep multiple installed package trees around. This is
>really of most interest to developers with large changes in their
>packages who also need to test against the stable versions of
>packages. Most users or administrators should simply figure out the
>incantation for --with-package-path that corresponds to site policy
>for installing third-party software, save it in a script, and not need
>to worry ever again.
>
>
I used to use --package-path. Then --with-package-prefix was
implemented, which supposedly simplifies things (no need to specify
mule-packages etc.) - but ~/.xemacs is not in the path generated. Or has
that changed?
when i first implemented this, ~/.xemacs was definitely added by
default. could we rethink this? we obviously want
--with-package-prefix to do the thing most users want; developers and
others can use the complex api if they don't want this.
ben