On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 12:09:41 +0200, Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> If the slowdown was a few percent, I wouldn't argue, but the Debian
> emacs packages slows down startup by a few magnitudes now.
Well, absolute times are also important; and this seems to
imply just fractio
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In the new directory proposed, one can put autolodas etc in a
> non-configuration file that is loaded at startup
> Pros:
> a) This file is gone when the package is removed, so no file
> existence check is required
> b) Simple variab
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> This is what I have heard so far. In the current mechanism
> Con:
> a) To correctly implement the configuration file, care must be taken
> to handle the removed-but-not-purged state, which requires a file
> existence test
Hi,
This is what I have heard so far. In the current mechanism
Con:
a) To correctly implement the configuration file, care must be taken
to handle the removed-but-not-purged state, which requires a file
existence test
b) One needs to make sure that user changes are not disc
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 18:41:50 +0200, Kai Großjohann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> getting irritated at unsubstantiated accusations
> I apologize.
Apology accepted, and in turn, I apologize for being snippy. I
really must get a thicker skin.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> getting irritated at unsubstantiated accusations
I apologize.
First of all, I consistently mistyped "dpkg --remove" as "dpkg
--purge" which is really silly, of course.
Secondly, I wrote "gnus" where I meant "$random_elisp_pkg".
I wasn't aware tha
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I really think he's using gnus as an elsip package picked at random
> > to illlustrate that some packages break when you --remove them
> > (everything is fine when you --purge). The broken packages must be
> > due to following some template file; gr
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:41:07 -0400, Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:40:47 +0200, Kai Großjohann
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > But the situation that Emacs stops working after "dpkg --purge
>> > gnus", say,
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:40:47 +0200, Kai Großjohann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > But the situation that Emacs stops working after "dpkg --purge
> > gnus", say, MUST be changed.
>
> This is the second time you have mentioned this foul
> ca
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:36:22 +0200, Kai Großjohann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I really have not seen the benefit of this split. If I have stuff
>> under /etc I am takling care of anyway, I would rather not spend
>> effort and code adding yet anothe
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:40:47 +0200, Kai Großjohann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> But the situation that Emacs stops working after "dpkg --purge
> gnus", say, MUST be changed.
This is the second time you have mentioned this foul
canard. Please demonstrate why purging (or even removing) G
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I beg to differ. I have two different Gnusii in my load-path
> -- and I can change the load-path to use one or the other. Same goes
> for bbdb, w3m, and a bunch of other things. The version of bbdb I use
> matters a lot to me.
Well, if you i
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I really have not seen the benefit of this split. If I have
> stuff under /etc I am takling care of anyway, I would rather not
> spend effort and code adding yet another directory and files to load
> up.
The benefit of the split is that Ema
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 09:45:51 +0200, Kai Großjohann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Sure. Autoloads don't count as configuration in my book either. If
>> that's all you need, then putting the script outside of /etc is
>> fine.
> Good.
>> But load-path
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 09:40:24 +0200, Kai Großjohann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> A, this is against policy; users need to be able to modify _all_
>> configuration matter.
> But it is not configuration matter. It is simply required for
> getting the
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure. Autoloads don't count as configuration in my book
> either. If that's all you need, then putting the script outside of
> /etc is fine.
Good.
> But load-path modifications are indeed configuration issues,
Really? It's like pass
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A, this is against policy; users need to be able to modify
> _all_ configuration matter.
But it is not configuration matter. It is simply required for
getting the package to work at all. It doesn't make sense for users
to remove it or change
On Mon, 19 May 2003 22:15:48 -0400, Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Then you better start getting policy changed.
>>
>> > You mean emacs-policy? That's not such a big thing, is it?
>>
>> If files in /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp.rc/
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Then you better start getting policy changed.
>
> > You mean emacs-policy? That's not such a big thing, is it?
>
> If files in /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp.rc/ directory contain
> configuration information, then that violates general debia
Dave Love <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > What we need is an alternate directory that is _not_ under /etc
> > where we could also put Emacs startup files.
>
> This already exists. What we need is _not_ to mess with what Emacs
> does by default, a
On Mon, 19 May 2003 20:04:14 -0400, Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 May 2003 11:54:52 -0400, Peter S Galbraith
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> One solution would be to modif
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2003 11:54:52 -0400, Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
> > Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> One solution would be to modify emacs to look for, before
> >> default.el and site-start.el, a /usr/share/emacs/d
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2003 08:17:51 -0400, Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
> > Unfortunately, that's against Debian policy.
>
> And rightly so, I think.
Sure.
> > What we need is an alternate directory that is _not_ under /etc
> >
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> A, this is against policy; users need to be able to modify _all_
>>> configuration matter.
>
>> I don't follow this argument. I agree that users should be able to
>> modify all configuration matters, but I don't see how it relates to
>> putting the
Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Here's what I've decide to do with `emacs-goodies-el' :
>> >
>> > (if (not (file-exists-p "/usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/emacs-goodies-el"))
[...]
>
On Fri, 16 May 2003 23:29:31 +0200, Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Fri, 16 May 2003 16:37:39 +0200, Simon Josefsson
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>>> One solution would be to modify emacs to look for, before
>>> default.el and site
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 16 May 2003 16:37:39 +0200, Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> One solution would be to modify emacs to look for, before default.el
>> and site-start.el, a /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp.el and have a
>> /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why not just write correct startup files, that know when the
> package is gone? And which preserve user changes? It isnot as if
> there are not examples of packages that do the right thing.
I've just filed a bug against dh-make based on this
On Fri, 16 May 2003 11:54:52 -0400, Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> One solution would be to modify emacs to look for, before
>> default.el and site-start.el, a /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp.el and
>> have a /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp.r
On Fri, 16 May 2003 12:40:12 -0500, Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Dave Love <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I was about to make one, and just came checking in the bug
>> archives... Check back later for a solution if you're interested,
>> when I've had time to submit it.
>>
>> Hear, he
On Fri, 16 May 2003 16:37:39 +0200, Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> One solution would be to modify emacs to look for, before default.el
> and site-start.el, a /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp.el and have a
> /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp.rc/ directory which corresponds to
> todays' /etc/e
On Fri, 16 May 2003 08:17:51 -0400, Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Unfortunately, that's against Debian policy.
And rightly so, I think.
> What we need is an alternate directory that is _not_ under /etc
> where we could also put Emacs startup files.
Umm, no. I wa
Dave Love <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I was about to make one, and just came checking in the bug archives...
> Check back later for a solution if you're interested, when I've had
> time to submit it.
>
> Hear, hear on the substance of the report. I filed bugs a while back
> about packages that
Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What we need is an alternate directory that is _not_ under /etc
> where we could also put Emacs startup files.
This already exists. What we need is _not_ to mess with what Emacs
does by default, as I've said before in other contexts without luck.
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One solution would be to modify emacs to look for, before default.el
> and site-start.el, a /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp.el and have a
> /usr/share/emacs/debian-lisp.rc/ directory which corresponds to
> todays' /etc/emacs/site-start.d/ but is managed en
Package: emacsen-common
Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [You'll need to close the new you created by emailing to:
> Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ]
I could not find any new bug report. Perhaps the BTS discovered I was
replying to an existing bug.
> Simo
[You'll need to close the new you created by emailing to:
Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
]
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Here's what I've decide to do with `emacs-goodies-el' :
> >
> > (if (not (file-exist
Package: emacsen-common
Version: 1.4.15
Severity: normal
Hi,
debian-emacs-policy should instruct package maintainers who add
autoloads and other setups in an /etc/emacs/site-start.d/ file to make
that conditional upon the package actually being installed.
If the package is removed and not purged
38 matches
Mail list logo
