Re: AUCTeX configuration, hardwiring etc...

David Kastrup wrote:
> (defvar TeX-lisp-directory
>    (expand-file-name @lispextralispdir@
>      (file-name-directory load-file-name)))
> 
> Then we have an option --with-extralispdir[=auctex] to configure.
> Extra means "outside of load-path" with a bit of fantasy.  If the
> filename is absolute (which is fine for deb and RPM), the
> load-file-name has no effect.  If it is relative (for stuff like
> XEmacs packages or when rolling a prepackaged Emacs that is installed
> into unknown territory), one can use "." to get the same directory as
> the startup file (which gets placed in lispdir).
> 
> Does this sound like a good scheme?

(Sorry for being away from mail over the weekend.) This was actually
what I was going to suggest. But I do not like the name. How about

  --with-auctex-lispdir[=auctex]

Anyway, in addition, we could test for the strings "yes" and "no" and
use autoconf's mechanism to translate "yes" to "auctex" and "no" to ""
(or so). The bonus is that we can use

  --without-auctex-lispdir

(which autoconf will translate to "no") and automatically get all the
files in $lispdir, without a subdirectory. Transparent and intuitive.
(I do not think there is much need to install into "$lispdir/no" 8^))


> Anyhow, the only
> sensible thing to place stuff in by default is site-packages.  It has
> _always_ been the case that defaults for autoconf are for site-wide
> installation (corresponding to a prefix of /usr/local/ commonly): it
> is customary to be able to do make as a normal user, and then install
> with sudo make install or similar.

Exactly. By the "principle of least surprise", this is what we should
do. It is Standard Behaviour.

/JÅ


-- 
Death before dishonor. Nothing before coffee!