GNU bug report logs - #21704
25.0.50; Package (package.el) doc should mention effects on `load-path'

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#21704: closed (25.0.50; Package (package.el) doc should
 mention effects on `load-path')
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 03:20:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Mon, 27 Jun 2016 23:18:59 -0400
with message-id <CAM-tV---18L-ESQmZ01Ao9EJ0kE=+z7sGarkxYQ_XEh7QWJ3TQ <at> mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: bug#21704: 25.0.50; Package (package.el) doc should mention effects on `load-path'
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #21704,
regarding 25.0.50; Package (package.el) doc should mention effects on `load-path'
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
21704: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=21704
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 25.0.50; Package (package.el) doc should mention effects on
 `load-path'
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 07:24:19 -0700 (PDT)

Apparently (at least from searching package.el and (emacs) `Packages'
and its subnodes), nowhere do we tell users the effect of using the
package system on `load-path'.  (Variable `load-path' is mentioned in a
couple of doc strings, but only for "internal-only" functions.)

There is this comment in the Commentary of `package.el':

;; At activation time we will set up the load-path and the info path,
;; and we will load the package's autoloads.  If a package's
;; dependencies are not available, we will not activate that package.

I think it is important (helpful) to explicitly make the connection for
users between `load-path' and the package system.  Please consider
making it clear.  Even just a statement such as the one in that comment
would help.

Here is one demonstration of the confusion that might be avoided if such
information were made more readily available:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-gnu-emacs/2015-10/msg00331.html

In GNU Emacs 25.0.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32)
 of 2015-10-06
Bzr revision: a4a98a1b2568793ead43e824ecf227768759df12
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --prefix=/c/Devel/emacs/snapshot/trunk
 --enable-checking=yes,glyphs 'CFLAGS=-O0 -g3'
 LDFLAGS=-Lc:/Devel/emacs/lib 'CPPFLAGS=-DGC_MCHECK=1
 -Ic:/Devel/emacs/include''

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>
To: 21704-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#21704: 25.0.50; Package (package.el) doc should mention
 effects on `load-path'
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 23:18:59 -0400

Version: 25.1

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> Please use @code{load-path}, not @var.

Done.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.