Re: Rationalize specifying "where the packages are" somewhat
Michael Sperber wrote:
>you've removed this and replaced it with something that is
rather
>more opaque; it will not be obvious to the average user which of the
>above options is correct. (presumably --with-late-packages?)
>
>
This can (and probably should be) easily fixed by giving this (and
possibly --with-early-packages, too) more intuitive aliases. I'm open
to suggestions. ("--with-packages" + "--with-user-packages", maybe?)
this sounds like a good start. we should probably do the same for
"-with-last-packages"; can you explain what this is supposed to be used for?
However, "--with-package-prefix" doesn't cut it because
it's
inconsistent with the terminology of the rest of the system, and
because a "prefix" can mean any of at least 3 things in the context of
the system.
ok.