GNU bug report logs -
#71356
use-package doesn't load org from elpa
Previous Next
Full log
Message #40 received at 71356 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Answers inline
On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 at 11:21, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> > From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
> > Cc: Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez <paaguti <at> gmail.com>, acorallo <at> gnu.org
> ,
> > 71356 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> > Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 06:15:44 +0000
> >
> > Sorry for the delayed response; I don't think that has to be expected.
> > While use-package can utilise package.el for package management, my
> > impression is that it is at liberty to be more flexible/declarative.
>
> Doesn't use-package utilize package.el already?
>
> If not, how does it handle installation and upgrades? by its own code?
>
> > > Do you have package-install-upgrade-built-in set non-nil? If not, can
> > > you set it non-nil and try the recipe again?
> >
> > I have tried it out myself, and it doesn't appear to do anything. The
> > issue looks like that `package-installed-p' doesn't respect
> > package-install-upgrade-built-in or :pin.
>
> We should fix that, I think. If package-install-upgrade-built-in is
> non-nil, use-package should upgrade built-in packages.
>
> > > As for a feature request: what exactly is the feature requested here?
> > > Are you saying that use-package should automatically upgrade built-in
> > > packages? If so, I don't think this will fly, since it would mean
> > > inconsistencies with package-install.
> >
> > IIUC the feature would be that if a use-package form has a
> >
> > :pin gnu
> >
> > argument, then this is an indication that we want to install the package
> > from GNU ELPA, disregarding the fact that Emacs already has a built-in
> > version of the same package. Sort of a package-local version of
> > `package-install-upgrade-built-in'.
>
> I'm not sure. People tend to copy/paste recipes from the Internet
> without really understanding what they do. I think a simple :pin
> should not be sufficient, we need some specialized keyword (in
> addition to supporting package-install-upgrade-built-in).
I didn't arrive at trying :pin gnu from anything in the Internet, but from
reading the use-package documentation (just this time ;-) )
> I am not familiar with the use-package code, but it seems like we could
> > implement this generally in package-install, by checking
> > `package-pinned-packages'.
>
> I would prefer not to introduce another indication of whether built-in
> packages should or should not be upgraded. If we do, we will next
> need to decide which one "wins" when they contradict each other.
>
My feeling is that if I set package-install-upgrade-built-in to t and pin
a package to (say) gnu elpa, that should be enough. I may resort to
use-package from everything, but would not use :pin on built-in packages
that I don't want to upgrade (makes no sense, right?).
It's a bit like adding a load-path to the use-package call
and download the package externally
(for example cloning with git) into that directory, which is
the way I use to get the development version of, for example, org-mode
when I want to contribute to it.
Does it sound strange?
/PA
--
Fragen sind nicht da, um beantwortet zu werden,
Fragen sind da um gestellt zu werden
Georg Kreisler
Headaches with a Juju log:
unit-basic-16: 09:17:36 WARNING juju.worker.uniter.operation we should run
a leader-deposed hook here, but we can't yet
[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]
This bug report was last modified 166 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.