> Do you really think load-path duplication will be a problem in
> practice? It seems to me that the normal require/provide should work
> just fine to do what you want. It seems unnecessary to invent these
> new functions. If you have a case where a fragment cannot be run twice
> you can always include a `featurep' test at the beginning of the
> fragment.

I once thought the same, and I changed the approach for some reason.
(which I forget now...)

> In my experience having more than one file with the same name, even if
> only one is in load-path, very easily leads to confusion. Especially
> when you consider things like the hideous "subdirs.el" that someone
> decided that emacs should use a couple of years ago. Instead, I think

Putting `.noseach' or like that prevents the directory to be included
in the load-path, as you may know.

> it might be better to give the fragment a different name. Then you
> could also put it in load-path (site-lisp I guess) and use the
> standard `require' to load it.

> Or just "(require 'foo-install)".

If with this, I like to use "netbsd", or "pkgsrc" as prefix, suffix,
or whateverfix, since these are very unique strings.

Masao