Re: emacs mode for running debuild, debc, and debi etc.

[Steve Greenland <steveg@moregruel.net>]

On 17-Oct-02, 00:00 (CDT), Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org> wrote: 
> Peter S Galbraith <p.galbraith@globetrotter.net> writes:
> 
> > Well, usually we byte-compile elisp files for all emacs flavours, and we
> > need to depend on emacsen-common for that.  If you omit that, then no,
> > you don't need to depend on it.
> 
> Packages aren't supposed to depend on emacsen-common directly.  At
> least not according to current policy:
>
> [*snip*]
> 
> If it's a big deal, then I can see about reviewing the code/policy to
> check if it might be OK to allow add-on packages to depend on
> emacsen-common directly.  For now, I'd continue to recommend against
> that.

I think this is worth doing. My simple mind imagines that things should work like this:

    The packages containing elisp should look for one or more emacsen to
    byte-compile with, and not worry if doesn't find any. If an emacs
    (Gnu, X, whatever) is later installed, it should byte-compile any
    installed elisps it finds.

In fact, I thought that the whole point of emacsen-common was to support
such usage. Now, if the package is *only* elisp, then a dependency is
appropriate. But requiring every package that contains a single little
emacs helper interface to its main functionality to depend on emacs
seems like overkill.

Steve

-- 
Steve Greenland

    The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
    system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
    world.       -- seen on the net