> On Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:33:39 -0400, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
Julian> On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 11:11:34AM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
>> Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Here's another suggestion. Why not leave the existing emacsen
>> > packages as t
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 11:11:34AM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Here's another suggestion. Why not leave the existing emacsen
> > packages as they are and apply the rule only to new versions of
> > emacs (so emacs21 and xemacs22 onwards)? That will
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> s/may never/will never/.
Well, I didn't want to rule out the possibility that we might think of
something clever between now and whenever emacs21 is released :>
> But if it's only for emacs21 onwards, let's give an appropriate
> example, and a footnote
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's another suggestion. Why not leave the existing emacsen
> packages as they are and apply the rule only to new versions of
> emacs (so emacs21 and xemacs22 onwards)? That will save the hassle,
> I guess.
Thanks for the suggestion. That sounded l
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's another suggestion. Why not leave the existing emacsen
> packages as they are and apply the rule only to new versions of emacs
> (so emacs21 and xemacs22 onwards)? That will save the hassle, I
> guess.
That sounds like a pretty good solution, a
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 04:16:26PM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > AFAICT, that seems to make sense. The only issue is the transition
> > between the old system and the new (dpkg doesn't like replacing
> > symlinks with directories). I don't know how
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 04:16:26PM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > AFAICT, that seems to make sense. The only issue is the transition
> > between the old system and the new (dpkg doesn't like replacing
> > symlinks with directories). I don't know how
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> AFAICT, that seems to make sense. The only issue is the transition
> between the old system and the new (dpkg doesn't like replacing
> symlinks with directories). I don't know how to resolve this,
> though.
Hmm. I didn't realize that was a problem.
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 02:07:21PM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Unless someone has a compelling reason arguing against this, I'm going
> to just change emacsen-policy to mandate that each emacsen should make
> the version specific dir, i.e.
>
> /usr/sha
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What would be the advantage to two directories? I guess it would be
> less confusing. I'm wondering if there would be any drawback, though.
> Maybe packages accidentally putting files in 20.X/site-lisp rather
> than emacs20/site-lisp, though I guess tha
I'm re-copying your entire reply because I put a bogus list name on my
first mail to you (which meant that debian-emacsen wasn't included).
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 06:20:40PM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> > To fix this, it seems like maybe we can just c
OK, so after all the back an forth about whether or not add-on
packages should just be responsible for cleaning up after themselves,
which I believe was concluded with a "yes", Julian recently did a nice
job of reminding me that there was still a real, honest-to-gooness
nasty problem with the curr
12 matches
Mail list logo