cygport suggestion: src_postinstall

[Ken Brown]

On 3/11/2012 7:42 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2012-03-11 17:53, Ken Brown wrote:
>> On 3/11/2012 8:52 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
>>> If you don't like my suggestion of providing src_postinstall, then
>>> I think there should be a different way for cygport users to have
>>> some control over the postinstall process. What about defining
>>> variables (like PREPEMACS, etc.) that allow the user to turn the
>>> __prep* functions on or off?
>>
>> If you don't like this suggestion either, what about the attached
>> patch? The rationale is that if the compile and install steps have
>> produced some byte-compiled files, then there's no reason for cygport
>> to step in and do more.
>
> Just because *some* files have been byte-compiled doesn't mean that
> *all* possible files have been. So what about using "--eval
> (batch-byte-compile `true)" instead of "-f batch-byte-compile"? That
> will ignore any files that have already been compiled.

That would solve the auctex problem, but I still prefer my version as a 
general principle.  It seems to me that you should give the package 
maintainers and upstream developers the benefit of the doubt.  If 
they've byte-compiled some files but not all, I think you should assume 
they have a reason.  But it's your call, obviously.

Ken