Re: preview-latex 0.9.1 and AUCTeX 11.whatever

David Kastrup wrote:
> I want to release preview-latex 0.9.1 some time next week

> a) installation procedure needs to get tuned.  I think that it might
> probably be reasonable if the search for valid Elisp installation
> locations is done by considering the following in this order:
> specified prefix (_if_ specified)
> emacs-binary derived prefix
> system default prefix (only if prefix was not specified explicitly)

Very good. Probably the messages should be tailored to notify the user 
why a
certain directory is chosen by the configure script.

> In a similar vein, the search for a valid texmf tree would consider
> specified prefix
> tex-binary derived prefix
> system default prefix (only if prefix was not specified explicitly).

I did not write the current code so perhaps I shouldn't change it.

> Search for XEmacs package dir also under libdir?

Yes. But given the right prefix, this would be found automatically. Unless
we want to specify more specific preferred install points, as in the old 
list:

${datadir}/${EMACS_FLAVOR}/site-lisp          (Emacs)
${libdir}/${EMACS_FLAVOR}/site-lisp           (Old Emacsen ?)
${libdir}/${EMACS_FLAVOR}/site-packages/lisp  (XEmacs)
${datadir}/${EMACS_FLAVOR}/site-packages/lisp (Recent XEmacsen ?)
${prefix}/site-lisp                           (Windows Emacsen)


> First match path variable to default locations, and only then go
> through all?

Perhaps check for a previous installation first? In any case, I would 
prefer a
list of preferred places, since that would give a more uniform client setup.
If that fails, go through load-path and take the first entry that 
matches some
_simple_ well-chosen rule, say $prefix/.*/site-lisp for Emacs and 
$prefix/.*/lisp
for XEmacs.

/JÅ