* doc/ref/tools.texi (Executable Modules): Say "guile-tools modules"
instead of "executable modules". Remove obsolete statements about
not ending in .scm, being executable, and beginning with shell
script invocation sequence.
* module/scripts/README: Ditto.
---
doc/ref/tools.texi| 33
It's just one variable definition, and in my opinion it confuses,
rather than helps, the overall build picture to have two names
(preinstguile and meta/guile) for the same thing.
* am/Makefile.am (am_frags): Remove pre-inst-guile.
* am/pre-inst-guile: Deleted.
* doc/ref/Makefile.am: Don't includ
* am/pre-inst-guile (preinstguiletool): Removed.
---
am/pre-inst-guile |7 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/am/pre-inst-guile b/am/pre-inst-guile
index 7993d15..b7b0d34 100644
--- a/am/pre-inst-guile
+++ b/am/pre-inst-guile
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-## am/pre-inst-
* configure.ac (GUILE_FOR_BUILD): Change normal build value to
'this-value-will-never-be-used'.
---
configure.ac |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index d033420..616bdda 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -1487,7 +1
Hi all,
Following are 4 simple (I believe) patches that simplify the build.
Plus the one at the end (#5) that is only very loosely related to this,
because of its mentioning of the $GUILE variable, but I think is a
useful cleanup anyway.
For me, these are part of working towards understanding an
* configure.ac: Use AM_SUBST_NOTMAKE for GUILE_FOR_BUILD instead of
AC_SUBST.
---
configure.ac |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index 423ae99..d033420 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -1496,7 +1496,7 @@ if test "
Andy Wingo writes:
> This is fun :)
>
> Here are a few threads the PLT folk had:
>
>http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.scheme.plt.devel/2540
>http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.scheme.plt.devel/2693/focus=2715
>http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.scheme.plt.devel/2775
Well indeed, tha
On Mon 21 Mar 2011 20:58, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> At some point there will have to be a triplet → arch → endianness
> conversion.
Indeed.
> I’d rather have that conversion occur as close to the UI as
> possible—i.e., close to ‘scripts/compile.scm’—rather than deep down in
> (sy
Hello!
Andy Wingo writes:
> On Sun 20 Mar 2011 22:31, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
[...]
>> Thus ‘%target-type’ would be inappropriate IMO because the target could
>> be chosen at run-time and it could be anything.
>>
>> ‘guile-tools compile --target=TRIPLET’ would be fine with me.
>
On Mon 21 Mar 2011 15:10, Neil Jerram writes:
> On 21 March 2011 12:16, Barry Fishman wrote:
>> Andy Wingo writes:
>>
>>> On Mon 21 Mar 2011 00:16, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
FWIW I’m happy with the verbose name and I fear the joke wouldn’t be to
everyone’s taste. I’d als
On 21 March 2011 12:16, Barry Fishman wrote:
> Andy Wingo writes:
>
>> On Mon 21 Mar 2011 00:16, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>> FWIW I’m happy with the verbose name and I fear the joke wouldn’t be to
>>> everyone’s taste. I’d also be happy with a shorter name, though.
>>
>> OK. Anyo
Barry Fishman wrote:
> Andy Wingo writes:
>
> > On Mon 21 Mar 2011 00:16, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> >> FWIW I’m happy with the verbose name and I fear the joke wouldn’t be to
> >> everyone’s taste. I’d also be happy with a shorter name, though.
> >
> > OK. Anyone have any
Le Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:27:13 +0100,
Andy Wingo a écrit :
> On Mon 21 Mar 2011 00:16, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
> > Andy Wingo writes:
> >
> >> it has a pleasant subject-verb-object when you say it: "Guido, compile
> >> my-file.scm."
> >
> > Is the pun[*] intended? :-)
>
> Not r
On Mon, Mar 21 2011, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hey!
>
> Andy Wingo writes:
>
>> it has a pleasant subject-verb-object when you say it: "Guido, compile
>> my-file.scm."
>
> Is the pun[*] intended? :-)
A more or less obvious pun (but not as smooth grammatically) would be
beguile(d)... "beguiled in
Andy Wingo writes:
> On Mon 21 Mar 2011 00:16, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> FWIW I’m happy with the verbose name and I fear the joke wouldn’t be to
>> everyone’s taste. I’d also be happy with a shorter name, though.
>
> OK. Anyone have any other good short names?
If you like short
> > On Mon 21 Mar 2011 00:16, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> >
> > > Andy Wingo writes:
> > >
> > >> it has a pleasant subject-verb-object when you say it: "Guido, compile
> > >> my-file.scm."
> > >
> > > Is the pun[*] intended? :-)
> >
> > Not really, no :)
> >
> > > FWIW I’m happy
> On Mon 21 Mar 2011 00:16, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
> > Andy Wingo writes:
> >
> >> it has a pleasant subject-verb-object when you say it: "Guido, compile
> >> my-file.scm."
> >
> > Is the pun[*] intended? :-)
>
> Not really, no :)
>
> > FWIW I’m happy with the verbose name an
On Mon 21 Mar 2011 00:16, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Andy Wingo writes:
>
>> it has a pleasant subject-verb-object when you say it: "Guido, compile
>> my-file.scm."
>
> Is the pun[*] intended? :-)
Not really, no :)
> FWIW I’m happy with the verbose name and I fear the joke wouldn
Hi,
On Mon 21 Mar 2011 01:24, Wolfgang J Moeller writes:
>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,option on-error backtrace
>>[...]
>
> Now if I could set that without typing ... didn't realize before
> that there's no obvious way to include REPL commands from a file.
In your .guile:
(use-modules (sys
19 matches
Mail list logo
