Re: Too much shell-escaping

Jan-Ake Larsson <[email protected]> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>> Jan-Ake Larsson <[email protected]> writes:
>> 
>> > Jan-Ake Larsson wrote:
>> >> Perhaps some other auctex is in load-path than the one for which we
>> >> are loading tex-site.el. Would the following work?
>> >> 
>> >> (defvar TeX-lisp-directory (expand-file-name 
>> >> 			    "auctex" 
>> >> 	                    (file-name-directory load-file-name))
>> >>    "*The directory where most of the AUCTeX lisp files are located.
>> >>    tex-site.el (wherein this variable is defined) resides in its
>> >>    parent directory. For the location of lisp files associated with
>> >>    styles, see the variables TeX-style-* (hand-generated lisp) and
>> >>    TeX-auto-* (automatically generated lisp).")
>> >
>> > After some simple testing here, it seems to work. Are there problems
>> > with using this, anyone?
>> 
>> Yes.  tex-site.el is placed in an arbitrary startup directory,
>> probably a directory intended for automatic installation.  auctex
>> is not necessarily below it.
>> 
>> But it would be fine with me if we have a default of
>> 
>> lispauctexdir='(expand-file-name "auctex" (file-name-directory load-file-name))))'
>> 
>> in our configure.in that only gets overriden when an _explicit_
>> --with-auctexdir is specified on the command line, so that
>> configure.in has the defaults
>
> There is no such switch in AUCTeX. You are probably confusing this
> with preview-latex, where -with-tex-site exists only to help that
> configure find AUCTeX.

I was talking about how things should be, not how they are.

> As far as I can see, tex-site.el is installed in $lispdir and
> $auctexdir is _hardcoded_ as $lispdir/auctex.

Yes, that is the current state of affairs.  After having outlined the
approach to be taken, I think I might be able to code the respective
stuff into the configuration folderol of both packages.

At least a first shot.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum