[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [AUCTeX-devel] [ELPA-diffs] /srv/bzr/emacs/elpa r312: Update AUCTeX

From: Uwe Brauer
Subject: Re: [AUCTeX-devel] [ELPA-diffs] /srv/bzr/emacs/elpa r312: Update AUCTeX ELPA package to the new 11.87 release.
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:39:02 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) XEmacs/21.5-b32 (linux)

>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:24:50 +0100, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:

   > Tassilo Horn <address@hidden> writes:


   > Now XEmacs will only distribute package files that have been assembled
   > by XEmacs tools in the XEmacs package tree.  
This is correct. I wish it were different, that there
existed a debian-like-alien tool which allowed to convert
one package into another one, like deb-->rpm

   > So the XEmacs packages that AUCTeX provides will work
   > fine, but you'll have to find, download and install
   > them manually instead of relying on the XEmacs
   > packaging system.

You can unpack it in ~/.xemacs/packages
or in 

   > What will be provided in the XEmacs package
   > repositories consequently is something massaged
   > manually to the necessary layout, commonly with
   > mistakes and several years behind.

Well if their package manager were faster it should be a
question of days not years :'(


   > The XEmacs compatibility code in the Lisp files itself is peanuts in
   > comparison.  No point in removing that as far as I can see.  However,
   > preview-latex has a somewhat more extensive compatibility setup.  It
   > would be arguable not to place the prv-xemacs.el files in the ELPA
   > packaging at least.   

That is your call to make.

   > Removing it from the source distribution would be
   > seriously unfair since it is technically complex enough that starting it
   > from scratch would be quite hard: that would be several man-months at
   > least from an experienced XEmacs programmer, and there are none as far
   > as I can see interested in AUCTeX.

Yes, please, do *not* remove it, that would be real nightmare
for Xemacs users.

Uwe Brauer 

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]