--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
24.5; (package-initialize) added to init.el without (setq package-enable-at-startup nil) |
|
Date: |
Sun, 06 Sep 2015 23:01:08 +1200 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0 |
package--ensure-init-file inserts (package-initialize) into the user's
init file, but it does not also insert (setq package-enable-at-startup nil),
which means that (according to (emacs) Package Installation) Emacs will
re-initialize the packages post-init:
> In some circumstances, you may want to load packages explicitly in
> your init file (usually because some other code in your init file
> depends on a package). In that case, your init file should call the
> function ‘package-initialize’. It is up to you to ensure that
> relevant user options, such as ‘package-load-list’ (see below), are
> set up prior to the ‘package-initialize’ call. You should also set
> ‘package-enable-at-startup’ to ‘nil’, to avoid loading the packages
> again after processing the init file.
0001-Disable-package-enable-at-startup-when-forcing-packa.patch
Description: Text Data
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#21423: 24.5; (package-initialize) added to init.el without (setq package-enable-at-startup nil) |
|
Date: |
Mon, 7 Sep 2015 11:26:38 +0100 |
Pushed the patch above plus some documentation in the NEWS and the manual.
2015-09-06 23:33 GMT+01:00 Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>:
>>> That said, this change would seem to be an issue for anyone who is
>>> performing a partial initialisation in their init file (for specific
>>> packages), and then depending on the default initialisation to deal
>>> with the remainder, post-init.
>>>
>>> I can only imagine that's a very small proportion of users indeed,
>>> but I presume the scenario ought to be considered (even if only for
>>> the purposes of documenting it in NEWS).
>
>> Yes, they'll have to add (setq package-enable-at-startup t) after
>> calling initialize. That should definitely go in the NEWS.
>
> I have a hard time imagining many users doing that. As a user, if I'm
> picky enough to try and do a partial initialization in my init file,
> I'll probably also want to do the final full initialization explicitly
> in my init file.
Now that it's pushed, I'm sure _someone_ will be affected by this and
will politely let us know. :)
--- End Message ---