shell unmaintainable

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Taken out of order.

>>>>> "Ilya" == Ilya N Golubev <gin at mo.msk.ru> writes:

    Ilya> Jerry James <Jerry.James at usu.edu> writes:

    >> (2) anybody who needs to compile their own due to maintaining
    >> local variations should be sophisticated enough to deal with a
    >> change in find-file-hooks.

    Ilya> Disagree.

I have a lot of sympathy for this.  I prefer that use of hooks be
reserved to the user (and packages the user explicitly `require's or
`load's).  IMHO, using them to implement standard features sucks.  If
this is really necessary, then I would suggest putting it in the
function itself, perhaps with a defcustom enabler.

However, using the hook to *experiment* with the feature is a
reasonable strategy.

    >> Can't you just stick with the officially released packages?

    Ilya> No.

Then you should fork.  Pick a reasonably fresh version, get it working
for you, put it in site-packages (which takes precedence over the
other hierarchies for precisely this purpose), and update when you
feel like dealing with the instability.

The CVS trunk is for development, instability is a fact of life there.

    >> As for the byte compiling issue, (require 'auto-autoloads) is
    >> not the right thing to do, because there are lots of
    >> auto-autoloads.el files, one per package in fact.

    Ilya> Right.  Is not core `lisp' directory first in `load-path'
    Ilya> when `-no-autoloads -vanilla' are specified, when compiling
    Ilya> packages in batch mode?

You presumably mean `-no-packages'.  `-no-autoloads' sets up the
paths, but then skips loading of the autoloads.  `-no-packages' is not
available in 21.4.

    Ilya> If can rely on that, still can do so.  Will load right
    Ilya> `auto-autoloads.el' in batch mode and have it already loaded
    Ilya> in regular interactive one.

Sorry, that's not going to be supported.  For one, it will probably
produce spurious warnings because of the way the auto-autoloads
features are provided.  We do not know what users will have in their
load-path---there may be unloaded auto-autoloads in directories
cons'ed on to the front!---and there's no guarantee that the file will
be loaded when -no-packages (-vanilla is implied, because most init
files depend on packages) is in effect.

Use `xemacs -no-packages -batch -l auto-autoloads' with 21.5.  Just
lose with 21.4; I don't know of a way to implement what you want in
21.4 off-hand, although it should be possible by doing surgery on
`load-path' before loading auto-autoloads.

-- 
School of Systems and Information Engineering http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.