From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: The load path Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:43:39 -0500 Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid? Message-ID: References: <1097949129.4178.31.camel@localhost> <87vfck4569.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1099676682 21356 80.91.229.6 (5 Nov 2004 17:44:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 17:44:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel , Marius Vollmer Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 05 18:44:28 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CQ88R-0002tN-00 for ; Fri, 05 Nov 2004 18:44:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CQ8Gd-000377-Rt for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:52:56 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CQ8G7-0002vF-87 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:52:23 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CQ8G5-0002tY-2d for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:52:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CQ8G4-0002sb-UB for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:52:20 -0500 Original-Received: from [129.22.104.47] (helo=mirapoint2.tis.cwru.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1CQ87j-0008Pu-D5 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:43:44 -0500 Original-Received: from multivac.cwru.edu (multivac.ITS.CWRU.Edu [129.22.114.26]) by mirapoint2.tis.cwru.edu (MOS 3.5.4-GR) with SMTP id CPE58816; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 12:43:40 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (qmail 21860 invoked by uid 500); 5 Nov 2004 17:44:02 -0000 Original-To: Rob Browning In-Reply-To: <87vfck4569.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> (Rob Browning's message of "Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:43:58 -0600") Mail-Copies-To: nobody Mail-Followup-To: Rob Browning , Marius Vollmer , guile-devel Original-Lines: 45 User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:4338 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:4338 Rob Browning wrote: > If the local version isn't installed in the same place as the site > installation, then it wouldn't try to load the site's files by > default. However, if you did want it to load them, you could just > create a symlink to init.d, or make the init call yourself. I'm thinking of the case where a user wants to avoid something the admin put in the init code, or insert some other code ahead of it. The user can't touch the sitewide init directory, so it can only be controlled on the command line. Disabling the init code is also a useful first step when tracking down a problem - Emacs and Guile both have -q, and Emacs also has --no-site-file. > Using NUMBERname makes it very easy to predict what's going to > happen. ... > On the other hand, I can see the concern that the NUMBERname > approach is perhaps best suited for a situation where you have > centralized organization (i.e. a distribution). Agreed on both counts. My preference is to push work as far upstream as possible (including when I'm upstream :) ), so I prefer systems that let the individual packages easily cooperate so there's nothing a distributor needs to do. > As background, one of the original reasons for our proposed changes is > to provide a standard place for distributions to put add-on package > files (a la emacs/site-start.d/). Packages' installation scripts could also find the site init directory and insert their init files there. > That might argue for a use-modules or require/provide style solution, > though if appropriate, we'd want a modified one that only looks in the > init.d dir so that startup files can't be confused with files in other > packages (i.e. don't use load-path). Maybe best practice would be to put the initialization code in a normal module called (foo init), and then the init file merely loads that module. paul _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel