SY> * "APA" == Adrian Aichner <adrian(a)xemacs.org&gt; writes: APA> What packaging route should we take regarding APA> ps-print-nomule APA> vs. APA> ps-print-mule APA> vs. APA> ps-print SY> How about... SY> - rename the package ps-print-nomule to ps-print SY> - ps-print.el is turned into a wrapper kind of thing: SY> (if (featurep 'mule) SY> (require 'ps-print-mule) SY> (require 'ps-print-nomule)) SY> - ps-print-mule.el becomes the Mule equiv of the old SY> ps-print.el SY> - ps-print-nomule.el becomes the non-Mule equiv of old SY> ps-print.el SY> Just a thought, what do you think? Emacs-20.7 has this: d:\tmp\emacs-20.7\lisp: total 212 drwxrwxrwx 2 AichnerAd 5 0 Nov 14 12:27 . drwxrwxrwx 2 AichnerAd 5 0 Nov 14 12:27 .. -r--r--r-- 1 AichnerAd 5 16189 Mar 10 1999 ps-bdf.el -r--r--r-- 1 AichnerAd 5 42569 Nov 20 1999 ps-mule.el -r--r--r-- 1 AichnerAd 5 154333 Jun 15 1999 ps-print.el where ps-print.el requires ps-mule.el. ps-mule.el uses autoloaded functions from ps-bdf.el (no require 'ps-bdf). I have merged our ps-print.el with http://www.xemacs.org/list-archives/xemacs-patches/199912/msg00158.html and am in the process of testing. My view: Ideally we should have one ps-print package with ps-bdf.el ps-mule.el ps-print.el in it. How we make use of ps-bdf.el and ps-mule.el remains to be discussed. My upcoming patch will deliver a merged ps-print.el somewhat more up-to-date than emac-20.7 ps-print, BUT with MULE functionality commented out. Thoughts? Adrian SY> -- SY> |---<Regards, Steve Youngs>-----------[GnuPG KeyID: 59E4C4B2]---| SY> | XEmacs - It's not just an editor... | SY> | It's a way of life. | SY> |----------------------------------<mailto:youngs＠xemacs.org>---| -- Adrian Aichner mailto:adrian＠xemacs.org http://www.xemacs.org