> you've modified the API of load-user-init-file

But we have never released a version of Emacs that includes this
function -- and it's an internal function. There are only two callers
of this function that exist, and they are both touched by this patch.

But, okay, the only reason I changed the arguments was because I
thought it was an improvement. Would you accept a patch that fixed
this bug without changing the arguments?

> All you want is to set a single variable to a specific value if the
> file wasn't found, right?

Not quite -- load-user-init-file *already* sets the variable to a
specific value, and the value is wrong. This patch changes the
specific value from the wrong value to the correct value.

> How hard can it be to do that after load-user-init-file returns and
> reports a failure?

I do not know how to do this, because it doesn't seem to me that
load-user-init-file reports failures at all. Instead, it handles them
itself. Hence why changing load-user-init-file is required.

> Or do that inside the function, but only if it processes early-init
> file specifically?

I really thought that this was exactly what my patch did. There are
exactly two places where this internal function is called, and
checking whether the optional argument is provided is the way to tell
whether the early init-file is being processed.

---

In conclusion, if I remove all the changes in this patch except for
the '(setq user-init-file ...)' line, would you accept that?

Best,
Radon