Andy Wingo skribis:
> On Tue 05 Mar 2013 17:45, Andy Wingo writes:
>
>>> ERROR: In procedure scm-error:
>>> ERROR: missing interface for module (does-not-exist)
>>>
>>> ... which defeats the whole purpose of autoloads.
>
> I pushed something that simply wraps the module binder in the autoload
>
Andy Wingo skribis:
> On Sun 10 Mar 2013 00:50, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>
>> On 9 March 2013 16:21, Andy Wingo wrote:
>>> On Sat 09 Mar 2013 02:41, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>>>
Interpretting ‘+’ timezone is sensible in a robust implementation,
>>>
>>> Yes, I agree, this makes sense.
>>>
Andy Wingo skribis:
> On Sat 09 Mar 2013 14:44, Jan Schukat writes:
>
>> Just tried it again on windows/mingw with the newer tarball:
>>
>> http://hydra.nixos.org/build/4290536/download/3/guile-2.0.7.157-929d1.tar.gz
>
> FWIW it seems hydra is totally down right now; of course that would
> happe
On Thu 14 Mar 2013 14:34, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>> Ok. What about Ludo's original comment, about the extra space in the
>>> sqlite header?
>>
>> Dunno. Is it common? In this particular case I would mail and try to
>> get them to fix their server, given that it is run by hacker
Andy Wingo skribis:
> On Thu 14 Mar 2013 14:34, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
Ok. What about Ludo's original comment, about the extra space in the
sqlite header?
>>>
>>> Dunno. Is it common? In this particular case I would mail and try to
>>> get them to fix their server,
Hello,
running the test below, I see on glibc-2.17 armv5tel-linux:
Running net-db.test
;;; (err -11)
unexpected error code: -11 "System error"
FAIL: net-db.test: getaddrinfo: no name
I mention glibc 2.17 because I think it didn't fail with glibc 2.13.
Regards,
Lluís.
On Thu, Mar 14,
Andy Wingo writes:
> On Wed 13 Mar 2013 19:10, Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> I don't know, it might not be that bad, now that we've agreed on a way
>> to extend the port structure in 2.0. Maybe we could just have a "last
>> peek-char returned EOF" flag that would be consulted by the other read
>>
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:13:39 -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> One extra check per read primitive is hardly enough of a cost to
> consider abandoning correctness, IMO.
Though I've not reviewed this code, I *think* you'd only need to check when the
buffer is empty. When the buffer is empty, it'll ta
