Raymond A. Wiker writes:
   Hubert Feyrer writes:
    > I assume you understood that the users (and that's what we act for here :-),
    > and with them their shells, don't have to include all those dir's
    > bin-subdirectories into ther $PATH, but only some common bin-dir
    > (/usr/local/bin), which contains only symlinks.

	   Just a quick comment here: Some applications
   will not work with this scheme. XEmacs, for example, looks at argv[0]
   and PATH and uses this information to locate the lisp libraries. So,
   in this case at least, it would be necessary to have a small
   shell-script wrapper instead of a symlink.

	   It would of course be possible to have a symlink to a wrapper
   located in the package directory...

This is not true for XEmacs.  On my system, the XEmacs in my path is a
symlink, and XEmacs follows the symlink to locate the lisp libraries.