Re: Re: preview-latex 0.9 released...

David Kastrup wrote:
> I had to get something out, the old stuff was decidedly nonrobust, I
> had to accommodate several new locations and getting it all to work
> reasonably under Windows and stuff would have been too much of chore.

Understandible. Sorry that I cannot help more, lack of time, I am
afraid. I'll chip in when I can.

> The order that was checked including libdir and things) did not seem
> to obey any defensible or at least well-documented rationale.=20

Agreed. It was based on a "this seems to work" test. libdir was there
for xemacs sake, and is no more. Does this work on xemacs? Not here.
Additionally, the packagedir test now only looks in $prefix and $datadir,
which does not work when Xemacs is not installed under $prefix.=20

It seems like the lispdir test will work under Emacs even if Emacs is
not installed under $prefix. At least that's something.

> I had several reports were the installation happened into decidedly
> bad trees. Now we are down to bad subtrees. Sorry for that.

What worries me is that the current code seems to pick out the first
entry in load-path that matches "site-lisp" or "site-packages". I'm
not sure this is very robust either.

I do like the new approach, but...


And the texmf test cannot find my tetex texmf tree anymore either.
/J=C5


--=20
Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use
regular expressions." Now they have two problems.


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click