Re: Modified load-path proposal

[Neil Jerram]

Kevin Ryde <address@hidden> writes:

> I think there's some confusion here.
>
> The automake docs read like AM_PATH_LISPDIR goes to wherever emacs is
> installed, but looking at the code for that macro, and giving it a
> run, I believe it merely chooses between
>
>       $libdir/emacs/site-lisp
>       $libdir/xemacs/site-lisp
>       $datadir/emacs/site-lisp
>       $datadir/xemacs/site-lisp
>
> according to whether $EMACS load-path has /something/lib or
> /something/share, and whether it's emacs or xemacs.

Thanks for the heads up.  I've looked at the AM_PATH_LISPDIR code now
and agree that you're right.

Together with the history that shows up if you google for
AM_PATH_LISPDIR, this suggests that Greg's and Ludovic's preference
for things only being installed under $prefix was right all along.

And if we go with that it also makes everything much simpler.

- We no longer need the idea that the distribution or Guile
  installation has a preference for where 3rd party packages should
  go, so the `default' marker in config.scm can disappear.

- Therefore we don't need the GUILE_SCHEME_DIR macro.

- Therefore we don't need tags or descriptions.

So all that's left is:

- config.scm, as previously described but with simpler format like
  this:

  ((load-path
    "/usr/share/guile/site"
    "/usr/share/guile"
    "/usr/share/guile/1.6"
    ...)
   ...)

- Guile's reading of config.scm on startup, as previously described
  (and respecting $sysconfdir)

- guile-config ensure-load-path and guile-config clean-load-path, for
  use at package author's discretion in Makefile.am.

Everyone happy with that?

     Neil