[AUCTeX-diffs] Changes to auctex/doc/install.texi

[David Kastrup]

Index: auctex/doc/install.texi
diff -u auctex/doc/install.texi:1.33 auctex/doc/install.texi:1.34
--- auctex/doc/install.texi:1.33        Wed Jun 15 13:01:18 2005
+++ auctex/doc/install.texi     Mon Jun 20 21:58:53 2005
@@ -381,6 +381,46 @@
 like @address@hidden Live}, this method may be generally preferable when
 providing packages.
 
+The following package structure would be adequate for a typical fully
+supported Unix-like installation:
+
address@hidden @samp
address@hidden preview-tetex
+Style files and documentation for @file{preview.sty}, placed into a
address@hidden tree where it is accessible from the address@hidden executables 
usually
+delivered with a system.  If there are other commonly used @TeX{} system
+packages, it might be appropriate to provide separate packages for
+those.
address@hidden auctex-emacs-tetex
+This package will require the installation of @samp{preview-tetex} and
+will record in @samp{TeX-macro-global} know where to find the @TeX{}
+tree.  It is also a good idea to run
address@hidden
+emacs -batch -f TeX-auto-generate-global
address@hidden example
+when either @AUCTeX{} or address@hidden get installed or upgraded.
address@hidden auctex-emacs-notex
+This package will be compiled with @samp{--without-texmf-dir} and will
+consequently contain the @samp{preview} style files in its private
+directory.  It will probably not be possible to initialize
address@hidden to a useful value, so running
address@hidden does not appear useful.  This package
+would neither conflict with nor provide @samp{preview-tetex}.
address@hidden auctex-xemacs-tetex
address@hidden auctex-xemacs-notex
+Those are the obvious XEmacs equivalents.  For XEmacs, there is the
+additional problem that the XEmacs sumo package tree already possibly
+provides its own version of @AUCTeX{}, and the user might even have used
+the XEmacs package manager to updating this package, or even installing
+a private @AUCTeX{} version.  So you should make sure that such a
+package will not conflict with existing XEmacs packages and will be
+at an appropriate place in the load order (after site-wide and
+user-specific locations, but before a distribution-specific sumo package
+tree).  It might be a reasonable choice to refrain from providing an
+XEmacs package and just rely on the user or system administrator to
+instead use the XEmacs package system.
address@hidden table
+
 @node Advice for non-privileged users
 @section Installation for non-privileged users