From xemacs-m  Tue Aug 26 11:12:07 1997
Received: from inf.enst.fr (QVQKkRApowuRIE80p8yUwFz6dKyLTQ7o@inf.enst.fr [137.194.2.81])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA22955
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 1997 11:12:04 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from metheny.enst.fr (metheny.enst.fr [137.194.160.27])
          by inf.enst.fr (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id SAA00124 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 1997 18:12:03 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from verna@localhost)
          by metheny.enst.fr (8.8.4/8.8.4)
	  id SAA07884; Tue, 26 Aug 1997 18:11:59 +0200 (MET DST)
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: package-path questions
References: <199708191252.OAA05406@metheny.enst.fr> 	<ocroh6ub4s0.fsf@ml.com> <199708261546.SAA04960@merlin.ornet.co.il>
X-Attribution: DV
X-Url: http://www-inf.enst.fr/~verna/
From: Didier Verna <verna@inf.enst.fr>
In-Reply-To: Ricardo Marek's message of "Tue, 26 Aug 1997 18:46:07 +0300 (IDT)"
X-Face: |j}\)O|k##MrRz#VK$Jy=0r=3Qc,,a/Tr6*JQbE73dy17]<u3$*$]4O\1|h\|O\EDT9d$n+
 MTB{U&>2YcmW$9Z&H21e}#~#pgc>dn(is5Bv1l!{1re+Q9suKIOUmOqZs2>QMxHlR;;}kaGYA@HR3D
 C6
X-Face: 6o|eiKqaHN.ANh8HXDzntcWUOCg\]RsOd.ctvm~*y}Y^R&*a+Co,\s#=HWsw3x$b_n2kJ#g
 (7u?J^@^xP)f,jUF|0Z'J:|G/bMA5O12*b,7`-Q`=pKsCRIpso07.Y>YB2H{7`?u&yh;C_ZtLHfj<!
 $J=.i&Al'?,ax]MZd4tcm)_wF3$n*:f/lgS.;?Jr3T;Fl^q<qP**'tw
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: 26 Aug 1997 18:11:59 +0200
Message-ID: <qyjbu2kore8.fsf@metheny.enst.fr>
Lines: 48
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.65/XEmacs 20.3(beta18) - "Bratislava"

Ricardo Marek <ricky@ornet.co.il> writes:

> >>>>> Colin Rafferty writes:
>  Colin: You do `make xemacs-package' in the footnote direcory, and then redump
>  Colin: xemacs.
> 
> What if the packages aren't located in /usr/local/lib/xemacs/packages?
> 
> The Makefile should be addapted to the correct location of the packages.
> 
> In the makefile you have:
> 
>    PACKAGEDIR = /usr/local/lib/xemacs/packages


	Good point. But it's difficult to figure out where the user will want
to make-the-package, since packages could be in different places. 

	A possible solution is that packages would presuppose they
will be untarred in a package directory (that is, where they will find
etc info and lisp directories) so they install themselves in relative
directories. I don't know wether it's a good idea or not, but anyway,
hacking one line in the makefile is not too much work ...

	To the contrary, if packages are required to provide automatic 
installation through Makefiles (it seems that only Steven's footnote
package does this right now), I think they should provide automatic
info installation through a call to install-info as well.

	The reasons are:

	1/ It's boring to be obliged to make a dir file by hand in a
	   package directory. (Without it, for instance, I don't see
	   any gnus node after typing C-h i, while I can still reach
	   it with `g')

	2/ It's boring to be obliged to add manually an entry for each 
           new package you add in this directory.

	3/ Package developers should be the ones to decide in which
	   section they want their package to appear in, and under
	   which name (cf INFO-DIR-SECTION and START-INFO-DIR-ENTRY)

--
    /     /   _   _       Didier Verna        http://www-inf.enst.fr/~verna/
 - / / - / / /_/ /      E.N.S.T. INF C214        mailto:verna@inf.enst.fr
/_/ / /_/ / /__ /        46 rue Barrault        Tel.   (33) 01 45 81 80 72
                      75634 Paris  cedex 13

