Jyri Virkki wrote: > Ali Bahrami wrote: > >> actual emacs binary available. The user has a choice of emacs binaries, >> and is free not to install the ones that are not of value. >> > > Actually I did have one comment which I forgot in the joy of just > seeing this case come in ;-) > > "Install" is a system-wide action (ignoring user images here) whereas > "choice" is individual. Mixing the two is confusing. > > Not everyone is on laptops, shared machines are still common, so > having /usr/bin/emacs trigger behavior on the mere presence of this or > that package isn't ideal. On a shared server both -x and -nox will > probably be installed since subsets of users may prefer one or the > other. I'd rather not have the behavior change suddenly for me just > because some other user went and installed the -x version. So it sure > would be nice if I can configure something (an env var, .rc file or > such) to lock in how it'll behave for me. > > There's other ways around that so I don't see it as vital, just a > suggestion that'd be nice to have. >
There is *no* reason to install no-x if you also have -x. The functionality is a strict subset, and emacs can always be run without X11 by specifying "-nw" on the command line. However, the case gets more interesting once gtk or athena based versions are available. Then choice could indeed play a role, and environment variables or some other per-user tunable would be nice. (I suppose just running /usr/bin/emacs-gtk or somesuch would work.) -- Garrett
