On 25 Feb 2011, at 13:42, Andy Wingo wrote:
>> $ guile-config compile
>> -D_THREAD_SAFE -I/usr/local/include/guile/2.0 -I/usr/local/include
>
> The -I/usr/local/include is added for some other library that Guile
> depends on -- GMP or libgc or something else.
>
> For example on my system I h
On Fri 25 Feb 2011 12:46, Hans Aberg writes:
> $ guile-config compile
> -D_THREAD_SAFE -I/usr/local/include/guile/2.0 -I/usr/local/include
The -I/usr/local/include is added for some other library that Guile
depends on -- GMP or libgc or something else.
For example on my system I have Guil
On 25 Feb 2011, at 12:07, Andy Wingo wrote:
>> * Developers should be clearly warned that -I/usr/local/include
>> needs to be after all other -I options, due to guile
>> header naming conflicts.
>
> This is incorrect. Guile 2.0 (and later) does not add
> -I/usr/local/include to the CFLAGS in a
On Thu 24 Feb 2011 22:49, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Andreas Rottmann writes:
>
>> That's not true for '$(...)', see SUSv3, Section 2.6.3.
>
> Solaris 5.10 /bin/sh:
>
>> echo $(echo foo)
> syntax error: `(' unexpected
Gross :)
Perhaps it's an argument for preferring Guile over sh
On Wed 23 Feb 2011 21:14, Bruce Korb writes:
> * Developers should be clearly warned that -I/usr/local/include
> needs to be after all other -I options, due to guile
> header naming conflicts.
This is incorrect. Guile 2.0 (and later) does not add
-I/usr/local/include to the CFLAGS in any co
Hi Bruce,
On Thu 24 Feb 2011 23:58, Bruce Korb writes:
> It simply doesn't feel like a straight forward interface.
> It feels like I am starting a "process this string" function,
> then inject some information, then call a function to scan
> a bit then process a bit. How would it ever get compi
On Thu 24 Feb 2011 17:35, Ken Raeburn writes:
> If the library ABI is tweaked to code the version into a symbol name,
> this test could become a simple compile-and-link test. Of course, that
> approach has other issues, like getting backwards-compatible library
> upgrades to work without recompi
Ludovic Courtès schreef op do 24-02-2011 om 22:52 [+0100]:
Hi Ludovic,
> Would you like to debug further, e.g., by adding ‘pk’s in boot-9.scm in
> ‘merge-generics’? :-)
Aren't you seeing this problem? I only see
(module-define! m 'merge-generics noop)
in boot-9.scm ...
Greetings, Jan
--
