Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor] writes: > Kyle> What's wrong with configuring with --package-path ? I've been > Kyle> using that for at least a year. Works fine. Put it into a > Kyle> script and you never have to type it again. > > There's plenty wrong with --package-path: you do that, and you > hard-compile paths into the executable. It becomes that much harder > to move the installation around afterwards. (I know: I implemented > it.) How much time do people spend moving distributions around? Contrast this to how many times people start XEmacs up. Who really cares if paths are hardcoded into the binary? XEmacs can be rebuilt from scratch (configure, compile, dump, everything) in about 10 minutes on my laptop, and this laptop is two years old. I'm looking at the prospect of even path probing at startup time and I think the priorites seem screwed here. But then I've always thought this.