[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?
From: |
James Cloos |
Subject: |
Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path? |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Aug 2016 16:07:19 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.95 (gnu/linux) |
>>>>> "RW" == Robert Weiner <address@hidden> writes:
RW> If a package unintentionally shadows/overrides a standard/core Emacs
RW> library, then it is the package that is broken and needs to be fixed. If
RW> instead the behavior is intentional then that is what the current load-path
RW> order is designed to allow.
The point is that if sub directories are nto automatically included, it is
easier to manage things. Especially when using one's dist's packaging.
I had to make substantial changes to my .emacs when the auto sub dirs
was added to fix all of the damage that caused.
-JimC
--
James Cloos <address@hidden> OpenPGP: 0x997A9F17ED7DAEA6
- why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, Alex Dunn, 2016/08/01
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/08/01
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, Alex Dunn, 2016/08/01
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, Robert Weiner, 2016/08/01
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, Alex Dunn, 2016/08/01
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, James Cloos, 2016/08/02
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, Robert Weiner, 2016/08/02
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?,
James Cloos <=
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, Robert Weiner, 2016/08/02
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2016/08/01
- Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?, Stefan Monnier, 2016/08/06