On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Tue 15 Jun 2010 23:41, No Itisnt writes:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Andy Wingo wrote:
>>> On Mon 14 Jun 2010 23:56, No Itisnt writes:
>>>
> There are some bugs still around regarding the compilation cache and
> r6rs modu
On Tue 15 Jun 2010 23:41, No Itisnt writes:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Andy Wingo wrote:
>> On Mon 14 Jun 2010 23:56, No Itisnt writes:
>>
There are some bugs still around regarding the compilation cache and
r6rs modules -- or specifically, with versioned modules, which r6rs
>
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Mon 14 Jun 2010 23:56, No Itisnt writes:
>
>>> There are some bugs still around regarding the compilation cache and
>>> r6rs modules -- or specifically, with versioned modules, which r6rs
>>> modules are. We're still working that one out and
On Mon 14 Jun 2010 23:56, No Itisnt writes:
>> There are some bugs still around regarding the compilation cache and
>> r6rs modules -- or specifically, with versioned modules, which r6rs
>> modules are. We're still working that one out and hpe to have something
>> in a couple days.
>
> Is that th
> There are some bugs still around regarding the compilation cache and
> r6rs modules -- or specifically, with versioned modules, which r6rs
> modules are. We're still working that one out and hpe to have something
> in a couple days.
Is that the issue I bumped into with (rnrs control)?
Hello Marco,
On Fri 11 Jun 2010 08:04, Marco Maggi writes:
> I just noticed that my cache has this file in it:
>
> /home/marco/.cache/guile/ccache/2.0-0.Q-LE-4/home/marco/.cache/guile/ccache/2.0-0.Q-LE-4/home/marco/var/tmp/proof.sps.go.go
>
> should I expect this or is something wrong with p
"Marco Maggi" wrote:
> I just noticed that my cache has this file in it:
Sorry, I forgot: i686-pc-linux-gnu, guile 1.9.11.
--
Marco Maggi
I just noticed that my cache has this file in it:
/home/marco/.cache/guile/ccache/2.0-0.Q-LE-4/home/marco/.cache/guile/ccache/2.0-0.Q-LE-4/home/marco/var/tmp/proof.sps.go.go
should I expect this or is something wrong with pathname
construction? I have not found a way to reproduce it for
n
