"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
I see two ways to go here. Mike used to argue that if XEmacs does
not
build in knowledge of $prefix, the package root should be the same as
the installation root. In that case, since I'm running in place,
Installation is actually lying about where it will find the packages.
(And I bet it would get it wrong for an installed XEmacs unless it
were installed in /usr/local/{bin,etc,lib,share}, but --with-prefix=no
is precisely intended to make no such promises.) If that's the way
we're going to go, we need to fix Installation (ie, configure's
reporting function).
Personally I prefer to think of the packages as a quasi-independent
project, so the package installation has a root of its own. It would
be convenient if XEmacs respected its promise in Installation and
looked for packages there. But I suspect that would make things more
complicated for users who really want to install XEmacs and the
packages as a single self-contained bundle.
What does everybody think?
There needs to be an option that, in the absence of other options
specifying explicit paths, means "no paths are compiled into the
binary". Currently, with-prefix is that option, and changing its
semantics would take this possibility away. (This option was not
created for running in place, but for creating relocatable binary
distributions.)
So I'm all in favor of changing Installation not to lie. It's easy
enough to tell configure to look for packages via the numerous
--with-XXX-packages options to configure.
--
Regards,
Mike
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta