Re: [PATCH] Don't augment LD_LIBRARY_PATH (was Re: [PATCH] do not augment environment)

2012-10-05 Thread Mark H Weaver
Hi Ludovic! Thanks for the review. I agree with your stylistic suggestions and will update my patch accordingly. What I'd like to discuss here is the logic of the library search order. l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Mark H Weaver skribis: > >> Following Bruce's suggestion, it causes

Re: [PATCH] Don't augment LD_LIBRARY_PATH (was Re: [PATCH] do not augment environment)

2012-10-05 Thread Mark H Weaver
Sjoerd van Leent Privé writes: > Just a quick note. Now with GUILE_SYSTEM_EXTENSIONS_PATH, this could > be very practical when developing a module. However, if a module is > already present AND is inside SCM_LIB_DIR or SCM_EXTENSIONS_DIR, it > would never override that situation. I believe there s

Re: [PATCH] Don't augment LD_LIBRARY_PATH (was Re: [PATCH] do not augment environment)

2012-10-05 Thread Sjoerd van Leent Privé
Hi Mark, Just a quick note. Now with GUILE_SYSTEM_EXTENSIONS_PATH, this could be very practical when developing a module. However, if a module is already present AND is inside SCM_LIB_DIR or SCM_EXTENSIONS_DIR, it would never override that situation. I believe there should be a way to be able