Subject: bug#19151: 24.4; Batch mode doesn't call package-initialize, can't find packages

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2016 11:00:31 +0300

> From: [email-masked]
> Cc: Gary Oberbrunner <[email-masked]>,  [email-masked]
> Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 21:24:45 -0400
> 
> >From a656d3ce526fc475a3067599f09b85771ea39ba0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Noam Postavsky <[email-masked]>
> Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 21:15:28 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH v1] Explain when package-initialize isn't called
> 
> * doc/lispref/os.texi (Startup Summary): Explain that package-initialize
> is not called when options -q, -Q, or --batch were passed (Bug #19151).
> ---
>  doc/lispref/os.texi | 8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/doc/lispref/os.texi b/doc/lispref/os.texi
> index 5f189b9..e15eec7 100644
> --- a/doc/lispref/os.texi
> +++ b/doc/lispref/os.texi
> @@ -155,9 +155,11 @@ Startup Summary
>  option @samp{--batch} was specified.
>  
>  @item
> -If @code{package-enable-at-startup} is non-@code{nil}, it calls the
> -function @code{package-initialize} to activate any optional Emacs Lisp
> -package that has been installed.  @xref{Packaging Basics}.
> +It calls the function @code{package-initialize} to activate any
> +optional Emacs Lisp package that has been installed.  @xref{Packaging
> +Basics}.  This is not done if @code{package-enable-at-startup} is
> +@code{nil}, nor if the options @samp{-q}, @samp{-Q}, or @samp{--batch}
> +were specified.

I would rephrase the last sentence:

  However, when @code{package-enable-at-startup} is @code{nil}, Emacs
  doesn't initialize packages.  When Emacs is started with one of the
  options @samp{-q}, @samp{-Q}, or @samp{--batch},
  @code{package-enable-at-startup} is @code{nil} by default; to
  initialize packages in that case, explicitly set that variable to a
  non-@code{nil} value (e.g., via the @samp{--eval} option).

The reason is that the additional explicit information about how to
initialize packages in this case is IMO valuable, and also we should
avoid passive tense as much as possible.

Thanks.