On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 04:04:59AM +0200, Danny Milosavljevic wrote:
> > My instinct is that we should make it refer directly to the libraries
> > (pcre and libgc) but that user-facing executables like make and g++
> > should be installed by the user.
>
> Yeah, I did it like that in the existing p
> My instinct is that we should make it refer directly to the libraries
> (pcre and libgc) but that user-facing executables like make and g++
> should be installed by the user.
Yeah, I did it like that in the existing patch.
> The examples may not be 100% relevant; is shedskin totally useless
> w
On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 02:13:24PM +0200, Danny Milosavljevic wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 18:19:09 -0400
> Leo Famulari wrote:
> > If it works, then I think it's better than propagating pcre and libgc.
>
> It does work.
>
> However, shedskin creates C++ source files and a Makefile. The user the
On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 18:19:09 -0400
Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 07:26:59AM +0200, Danny Milosavljevic wrote:
> > Patch that does the latter. Is that OK?
>
> If it works, then I think it's better than propagating pcre and libgc.
It does work.
However, shedskin creates C++ sou