[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by
From: |
Andrew Tropin |
Subject: |
bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix |
Date: |
Tue, 11 May 2021 21:55:43 +0300 |
> the "-pkg\\.el$" exclude might have existed for a reason
> (I don't know which, put perhaps byte compilation).
Perhaps it should be ignored during byte compilation, but still
installing it seems to be a good idea. Ok, let's wait for Maxim answer.
> I know people take package.el for granted nowadays, but alternative
> package managers for Emacs have their uses. This is not just a Guix
> thing :)
Why not take it for granted?) It's built-in since 24(?), elpa/melpa
archives respect it format and provide package descriptions in -pkg.el
format, AFAIK. Most other package managers seem to respect
"infrastructure" provided by package.el. For example you can view a list
of packages with `list-packages` even for packages installed with other
PMs (Nix for example), BTW they keep "package.el" directory structure.
https://0x0.st/-BxL.txt
Don't see too many reasons not to follow this format.
I mean it's easily fixable with current directory structure just by
stripping "/elpa" suffix from package-directory-list, but why we would
do that emacs "customization" instead of just placing packages under /elpa
subdirectory and make everything work out of the box?
> I don't think we want to fake elpa that hard. Two iterations ago it
> was .guix.d and people didn't really like it.
Do you mean the package installation path was site-lisp/.guix.d/NAME-VERSION?
> My subdirs.el patch is also stretching it.
Not sure what you mean by this, sorry, I'm not native speaker and
automated translation doesn't make sense to me. Rephrase please.
I do not insist on any particular directory structure, just curious why
not to stick to the widely adopted format. Once again, thank you for placing
packages into subdirectories, now the site-lisp structure seems more
organized and less polluted + problem with describe-package (C-h P) and
list-packages are easily fixable. Appreciate your work!)
--
Best regards,
Andrew Tropin
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Andrew Tropin, 2021/05/10
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Leo Prikler, 2021/05/11
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Andrew Tropin, 2021/05/11
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Leo Prikler, 2021/05/11
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix,
Andrew Tropin <=
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Leo Prikler, 2021/05/11
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Andrew Tropin, 2021/05/19
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Leo Prikler, 2021/05/19
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Andrew Tropin, 2021/05/19
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Leo Prikler, 2021/05/19
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Arun Isaac, 2021/05/20
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Arun Isaac, 2021/05/20
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Leo Prikler, 2021/05/20
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Andrew Tropin, 2021/05/23
- bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix, Leo Prikler, 2021/05/20