>> If the logic is that the only entry point to the local/bin scripts is >> through the "sage" shell script then why would there be ever SAGE_ROOT >> be unset (except in evil cases where someone removes it from the >> environment)? > > That is definitely not the case.
OK. But then I would suggest, that it should be. And thus open up a discussion about the pros and cons. > The "sage -sh" command was a > relatively recent addition to Sage, at least from my point of view. > For most of my time working on Sage, when I wanted to setup the Sage > environment variables, I typed > > . local/bin/sage-env But that is basically the same thing. What I would like to see is: Any script inside $SAGE_ROOT/local/bin can safely assume that sage-env has already been sourced. If such a script recognises that there is something wrong with the environment, then this should count as a bug. So there are three things 1. "sage" should be the only entry point for any non-developer. 2. $SAGE_ROOT/local/bin is not known to non-developers. 3. Inside $SAGE_ROOT/local/bin scripts can assume a proper environment. Ralf --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
