On Sun, Aug 18, 2002 at 07:31:21PM -0400, D. Goel wrote:
You wouldn't be confusing the directories
/usr/share/emacsversion/site-lisp/*, which contain the .elc files,
and the directories /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/*, which contain the
.el files, would you?
Julian
i do see now what
Julian
[1] It seems that, by default, /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/foo/ don't
No, this package *does* have a /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/erc/
directory in it.
We miscommunicated. Yes, the packages *does* have it, but it does not
get added to the load-path. This neglect is true of most
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 08:54:12AM -0400, D. Goel wrote:
Julian
[1] It seems that, by default, /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/foo/ don't
No, this package *does* have a /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/erc/
directory in it.
We miscommunicated. Yes, the packages *does* have it, but it does
Julian
Why should it be added to the load-path?
Because many emacs functions depend on emacs having access to the
.el files. M-x find-function and M-x find-variable come to mind. If
.el is not in the load-path, emacs will take you the the
nearly-unreadable .elc file when you M-x
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 157123 emacsen-common
Bug#157123: project: modify emacs policy
Bug reassigned from package `project' to `emacsen-common'.
retitle 157123 emacsen-common: policy should require .el files to be in the
emacs load-path
Bug#157123: project
On Sat, Aug 17, 2002 at 09:32:48PM -0400, Deepak Goel wrote:
Hello
Debian's emacs policy seems to be such that additional packages delete
the .el files after installing the package. The .el files hardly cost
any space in comparison to the .elc files, you might as well leave
them there---
Package: project
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-17
Severity: minor
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux computer 2.4.6-1 #1 Thu Aug 30 18:26:54 EDT 2001 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=
Hello
Debian's emacs policy seems to be such that
7 matches
Mail list logo
