Re: package.el: bytecode portability across emacs versions

[Trent Buck]

On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 10:00:58AM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Trent" == Trent Buck <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> Trent> OK, so what file system do you think package.el should use?  Or is it
> Trent> also a bad idea to share $HOME across hosts running different Emacs
> Trent> releases?
> 
> I know that sharing bytecode is bad.  I just didn't know what to do
> about it.
> 
> Putting the bytecode elsewhere could be done but I gather that this
> doesn't work too well in some situations.  

On systems with links, you could do something like

    sources/foo-1/foo.el
    21.4/foo-1/foo.el -> ../../sources/foo-1/foo.el
    21.4/foo-1/foo.elc
    23.0.0.1/foo-1/foo.el -> ../../sources/foo-1/foo.el
    22.0.0.1/foo-1/foo.elc

I don't know how well this solves the
sources-should-be-in-the-same-place-as-bytecode issue, because I don't
fully understand the consequences of *not* doing it.  In any case, it
wouldn't work on at least some Windows systems (right?).
-- 
Trent Buck

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature