emacs and /etc/alternatives

[Andrew Haley]

Matthew Miller writes:
 > On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 10:52:33PM +0100, Miloslav Trmac wrote:
 > > > If both are functionally similar, yet the script solution avoids changes
 > > > to the filesystem *and* is much simpler, why not stick to the script
 > > > solution?
 > > If you completely ignore the original purpose of alternatives and focus
 > > only on the mechanism, following a few symlinks set up by alternatives
 > > is actually both more effective and simpler than starting bash to
 > > execute the script.
 > 
 > The overhead of bash vs. a symlink is negligible when we're talking about
 > launching *emacs*. The real difference is: one is trivial and
 > self-contained, whereas the other relies on an whole infrastructure.
 
Exactly.  This is a change without a purpose.  The existing solution
works perfectly well: it ain't broken, so don't fix it.

Andrew.