[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error]
From: |
Xah Lee |
Subject: |
Re: setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error] |
Date: |
Fri, 7 Aug 2009 04:43:33 -0700 (PDT) |
User-agent: |
G2/1.0 |
On Aug 7, 2:30 am, Eli Zaretskii <e...@gnu.org> wrote:
> IMO, mixing a native Windows build of Emacs and Cygwin executables
> that Emacs features need is asking for trouble. You can, of course,
> make this work, but then you'd need to tinker quite a lot with Emacs
> features, read their code, and change many defaults to make them work
> as intended. PATH and exec-path are indeed two settings you will need
> to put under tight control, to make things work. But I'm sure there
> are others.
>
> I don't recommend such a mix to anyone who needs Emacs on Windows to
> "just work". If you like Cygwin, simply install the Cygwin build of
> Emacs and be done. Emacs 23.1 _does_ supported the Cygwin build, and
> after many years there's again an active maintainer of the Cygwin
> Emacs. So any problems you find there will probably be fixed without
> delays.
>
> OTOH, if you need to be able to invoke native Windows programs from
> Emacs, and Cygwin somehow doesn't let you to do that, use native
> Windows ports exclusively. That is what I do, and I have yet to see a
> significant problem that wouldn't be resolved by installing a native
> Windows port of some utility, or by fixing some bug in Emacs. (For
> example, yesterday I fixed Calc to allow graphing commands to work
> with the native Windows port of Gnuplot.)
>
> Keeping your work environment uniform and coherent will save you many
> hours of grief and hair-pulling. Unless, of course, you like to
> tinker, in which case the mix you have now is the way to go. I'm sure
> you will learn a lot down the road, both about Emacs and about the
> programs it invokes.
umm... good idea. Sounds like a good advice. Thanks.
> I'm sure
> you will learn a lot down the road, both about Emacs and about the
> programs it invokes.
O wait, this bit i don't think i agree. LOL.
Xah
∑ http://xahlee.org/
☄
- Re: Flyspell error, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: Flyspell error, Xah Lee, 2009/08/04
- Re: Flyspell error, sam jesse, 2009/08/05
- setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error], Xah Lee, 2009/08/05
- Re: setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error], Lennart Borgman, 2009/08/05
- Re: setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error], Eli Zaretskii, 2009/08/05
- RE: setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error], Drew Adams, 2009/08/05
- Message not available
- Re: setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error], Xah Lee, 2009/08/06
- Message not available
- Re: setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error], Xah Lee, 2009/08/06
- Re: setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error], Eli Zaretskii, 2009/08/07
- Message not available
- Re: setevn PATH vs exec-path [was Re: Flyspell error],
Xah Lee <=
- Message not available
- Re: Flyspell error, Anselm Helbig, 2009/08/05
- Re: Flyspell error, sam jesse, 2009/08/05
- Re: Flyspell error, sam jesse, 2009/08/06
- Message not available
- Re: Flyspell error, Xah Lee, 2009/08/06
- Re: Flyspell error, Lennart Borgman, 2009/08/02