emacs and /etc/alternatives

[John Dennis]

On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 12:47 -0500, Chip Coldwell wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Your point about xemacs is a very strong argument for not using
> > alternatives. That's *exactly* what it's not for.
> 
> I don't see your point.  With /etc/alternatives, you could have both GNU 
> emacs (X and no-X versions) and Lucid/XEmacs installed simultaneously and 
> each user could run the one he prefers.  Those who have no preference 
> would get the systemwide default set in /etc/alternatives.

With alternatives the commands are supposed to be functionally
identical. To the best of my knowledge this is not true with the
different emacs variants.
-- 
John Dennis <jdennis at redhat.com>