Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> The INSTALL.txt text should reflect the current situation, not
>> future ones. So it is more like
>>
>> libguile 2.x is getting used if no installation of 1.8.8 is
>> found during configuration. However, matching the reliability
>> and performance of
> The INSTALL.txt text should reflect the current situation, not
> future ones. So it is more like
>
> libguile 2.x is getting used if no installation of 1.8.8 is
> found during configuration. However, matching the reliability
> and performance of LilyPond when using libguile
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 11:36 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> hah...@hahnjo.de
>> > writes:
>>
>> > Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 11:17 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> > > Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> > > hah...@hahnjo.de
>> > >
>> > > > writes:
>> > > >
Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 11:36 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 11:17 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > Jonas Hahnfeld <
> > > hah...@hahnjo.de
> > >
> > > > writes:
> > > > Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 10:50
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 11:17 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> hah...@hahnjo.de
>> > writes:
>>
>> > Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 10:50 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> > > Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> > > hah...@hahnjo.de
>> > >
>> > > > writes:
>> > > >
Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 11:17 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 10:50 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > Jonas Hahnfeld <
> > > hah...@hahnjo.de
> > >
> > > > writes:
> > > > Am Freitag, den 13.03.2020, 23:09
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 10:50 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> hah...@hahnjo.de
>> > writes:
>>
>> > Am Freitag, den 13.03.2020, 23:09 -0600 schrieb Anthony Fok:
>> > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 2:02 AM Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> > > hah...@hahnjo.de
>> >
Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 10:50 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Freitag, den 13.03.2020, 23:09 -0600 schrieb Anthony Fok:
> > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 2:02 AM Jonas Hahnfeld <
> > > hah...@hahnjo.de
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > I'm still
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Freitag, den 13.03.2020, 23:09 -0600 schrieb Anthony Fok:
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 2:02 AM Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> hah...@hahnjo.de
>> > wrote:
>> > I'm still not convinced that we need compatibility code, but I'm happy
>> > with anything that gets us to a release and
Am Freitag, den 13.03.2020, 23:09 -0600 schrieb Anthony Fok:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 2:02 AM Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > wrote:
> > I'm still not convinced that we need compatibility code, but I'm happy
> > with anything that gets us to a release and is not technically wrong.
>
> By
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 2:02 AM Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> I'm still not convinced that we need compatibility code, but I'm happy
> with anything that gets us to a release and is not technically wrong.
By the way, from a Debian package maintainer point of view, breaking
backward compatibility is OK
On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 8:08 AM David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Anthony Fok writes:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Thank you all for your kind considerations to system integrators like me.
> > :-D
> >
> > I recently submitted a patch to Denemo to get its configure.ca to
> > check for (hence support)
Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:40 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld:
> Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > So I am reasonably confident that with some reasonably designed chunks
> > of code, we'd end up with comparatively small headaches in upkeep. My
> > own gut feeling
Thomas Morley writes:
> Am So., 8. März 2020 um 13:37 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
>
>> We have a current issue that
>> has already bitten several not-completely-stupid developers
>
> I'm obviously one of the more stupid ones ;)
> I never understood how to use pkg-config, thus I always make the
>
Am So., 8. März 2020 um 13:37 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
> We have a current issue that
> has already bitten several not-completely-stupid developers
I'm obviously one of the more stupid ones ;)
I never understood how to use pkg-config, thus I always make the
guile-version I need, the
> I think a safe step right now is for Werner to update the upstream
> pkgconfig autoconf support. Whatever we end up with, there is no
> point in designing a solution that does not involve that as a
> component. I wanted to suggest him fast-tracking that change
> separately because of that.
Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:40 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld:
> Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > So I am reasonably confident that with some reasonably designed chunks
> > of code, we'd end up with comparatively small headaches in upkeep. My
> > own gut feeling
Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 15:04 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > Jonas Hahnfeld <
> > > hah...@hahnjo.de
> > >
> > > > writes:
> > > > How about the attached change? This
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 15:04 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> hah...@hahnjo.de
>> > writes:
>>
>> > How about the attached change? This attempts to locate the .pc file
>> > next to guile-config and tries to be very transparent about this. If it
Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 15:04 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 13:37 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > At any rate, can we focus on the issue at hand rather than building our
> > > strawmen from straw of future
On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 3:04 PM David Kastrup wrote:
> Ok, I am obviously missing something important here. You go to a lot of
> pain to use pkgconfig when someone specifies guile-config. Now let's
> just assume that someone uses guile-config because they either don't
> know better or it's the
Anthony Fok writes:
> Dear all,
>
> Thank you all for your kind considerations to system integrators like me. :-D
>
> I recently submitted a patch to Denemo to get its configure.ca to
> check for (hence support) guile-2.2 too because guile-2.0 is going
> away in Debian:
>
> *
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 13:37 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> At any rate, can we focus on the issue at hand rather than building our
>> strawmen from straw of future harvests? We have a current issue that
>> has already bitten several not-completely-stupid
Dear all,
Thank you all for your kind considerations to system integrators like me. :-D
I recently submitted a patch to Denemo to get its configure.ca to
check for (hence support) guile-2.2 too because guile-2.0 is going
away in Debian:
* https://github.com/denemo/denemo/commit/9c6ad2d
*
Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 13:37 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> At any rate, can we focus on the issue at hand rather than building our
> strawmen from straw of future harvests? We have a current issue that
> has already bitten several not-completely-stupid developers (even if you
> disagree
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 12:50 +0100 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
>> > Not being able to change gradually makes development more painful.
>>
>> > There was discussion as to why there are so few developers - this
>>
>> > will be my prime reason if I'm required to add
Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 12:50 +0100 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
> > Not being able to change gradually makes development more painful.
>
> > There was discussion as to why there are so few developers - this
>
> > will be my prime reason if I'm required to add compatibility for
>
> > everything.
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 12:34 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> hah...@hahnjo.de
>> > writes:
>>
>> > Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 11:54 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> > > Han-Wen Nienhuys <
>> > > hanw...@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > > writes:
>> > >
> Not being able to change gradually makes development more painful.
> There was discussion as to why there are so few developers - this
> will be my prime reason if I'm required to add compatibility for
> everything. Yes, this includes things so fundamental as Guile.
Uh, oh, now you are
>> > > > The following prints an error and directs the integrators
>> > > > into the right direction:
>> > > >
>> > > > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
>> > > > index 29e4e5680f..80a34f7b09 100644
>> > > > --- a/configure.ac
>> > > > +++ b/configure.ac
>> > > > @@ -189,6 +189,11 @@
Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 12:34 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 11:54 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > Han-Wen Nienhuys <
> > > hanw...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > writes:
> > > > > What about "an error would be a
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 11:54 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <
>> hanw...@gmail.com
>> > writes:
>> > >
>> > > What about "an error would be a nuisance when trying to have a common
>> > > configuration for both 2.20 and 2.21" was unclear?
>
> There
Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 11:54 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys <
> hanw...@gmail.com
> > writes:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 11:33 AM David Kastrup <
> > d...@gnu.org
> > > wrote:
> > > Jonas Hahnfeld <
> > > hah...@hahnjo.de
> > > > writes:
> > >
> > > > Am Samstag, den
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 11:33 AM David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
>>
>> > Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 23:20 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>>
>> >> So assuming GUILE_CONFIG is set, that should be tried in preference
>> >> to a .pc file, giving a warning
On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 11:33 AM David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
>
> > Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 23:20 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>
> >> So assuming GUILE_CONFIG is set, that should be tried in preference
> >> to a .pc file, giving a warning (an error would be a nuisance when
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 23:20 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> So assuming GUILE_CONFIG is set, that should be tried in preference
>> to a .pc file, giving a warning (an error would be a nuisance when
>> trying to have a common configuration for both 2.20 and 2.21, a
Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 23:20 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Werner LEMBERG <
> w...@gnu.org
> > writes:
>
> > > I have no beef with deprecating it.
> >
> > What about the following route? For guile, I would add support for
> > `guile-config`, using the following algorithm (with item 1
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> I have no beef with deprecating it.
>
> What about the following route? For guile, I would add support for
> `guile-config`, using the following algorithm (with item 1 already
> implemented).
>
> 1. Search for a guile `.pc` file, checking whether version 1.8.x,
>
> I have no beef with deprecating it.
What about the following route? For guile, I would add support for
`guile-config`, using the following algorithm (with item 1 already
implemented).
1. Search for a guile `.pc` file, checking whether version 1.8.x,
2.2.x, or 2.0.x is present (in this
Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 16:24 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 13:53 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > Jonas Hahnfeld <
> > > hah...@hahnjo.de
> > >
> > > > writes:
> > > > Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 11:19
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 13:53 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Jonas Hahnfeld <
>> hah...@hahnjo.de
>> > writes:
>>
>> > Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 11:19 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> > > We are not talking about "keep everything compatible". We are talking
>> >
Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 13:53 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 11:19 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > We are not talking about "keep everything compatible". We are talking
> > > about making changes in a manner
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 11:19 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>>
>> We are not talking about "keep everything compatible". We are talking
>> about making changes in a manner where they don't trip people up. They
>> way to deprecate a way of doing things is not to
Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 11:34 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 08:54 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > David Kastrup <
> > > d...@gnu.org
> > >
> > > > writes:
> > > > If I previously did
> > > >
> > > >
Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 11:24 +0100 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
> >> I updated my build script, see below.
>
> >
>
> > How did you notice that you had to?
>
>
> Since I don't have guile 2.x installed the problem was immediately
> visible.
>
> >> Note that I install texi2html 1.82 and guile
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 08:54 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> David Kastrup <
>> d...@gnu.org
>> > writes:
>>
>> > If I previously did
>> >
>> > GUILE_CONFIG=/usr/local/tmp/guile-1.8/bin/guile-config ./configure
>> > ./config.status --recheck
>> >
>> > then the
Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 11:19 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <
> hah...@hahnjo.de
> > writes:
>
> > Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 10:37 +0100 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
> > > > > > Is there anybody who recently built with a non-system version of
> > > > > > Guile-1.8 intentionally?
>> I updated my build script, see below.
>
> How did you notice that you had to?
Since I don't have guile 2.x installed the problem was immediately
visible.
>> Note that I install texi2html 1.82 and guile 1.8.8 in
>> `/uar/local/opt`.
>
> So what do you do if you also have guile-2.2 and
Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
> Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 10:37 +0100 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
>> >>> Is there anybody who recently built with a non-system version of
>>
>> >>> Guile-1.8 intentionally?
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> I do this all the time.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > So how did you do it last week?
>>
Werner LEMBERG writes:
Is there anybody who recently built with a non-system version of
Guile-1.8 intentionally?
>>>
>>> I do this all the time.
>>
>> So how did you do it last week?
>
> I updated my build script, see below.
How did you notice that you had to?
> Note that I install
>> As I said: I believe the proper action is to make LilyPond's
>> `configure` script emit a warning if it finds GUILE_CONFIG set.
>
> I disagree: Why do we have to keep everything compatible for a new
> *major* release like it used to be in the past? That's very
> prohibitive of any
Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 10:37 +0100 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
> >>> Is there anybody who recently built with a non-system version of
>
> >>> Guile-1.8 intentionally?
>
> >>
>
> >> I do this all the time.
>
> >
>
> > So how did you do it last week?
>
>
> I updated my build script, see
Am Samstag, den 07.03.2020, 08:54 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> David Kastrup <
> d...@gnu.org
> > writes:
>
> > If I previously did
> >
> > GUILE_CONFIG=/usr/local/tmp/guile-1.8/bin/guile-config ./configure
> > ./config.status --recheck
> >
> > then the Guile configuration was reused. If I
>>> Is there anybody who recently built with a non-system version of
>>> Guile-1.8 intentionally?
>>
>> I do this all the time.
>
> So how did you do it last week?
I updated my build script, see below. Note that I install texi2html
1.82 and guile 1.8.8 in `/uar/local/opt`.
>> Usually, I try to
> For example, FreeType's `configure --help` output produces
>
> ...
> PKG_CONFIG path to pkg-config utility
> PKG_CONFIG_PATH
> directories to add to pkg-config's search path
> PKG_CONFIG_LIBDIR
> path overriding pkg-config's built-in search path
>
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>>> and all of those messages are auto-generated.
>>
>> So? This does not provide a documented way of getting Guile
>> activated at all unless you are a 14th level system building
>> magician.
>
> I'll try to update the documentation, too.
>
>> So the correct way is to
>> and all of those messages are auto-generated.
>
> So? This does not provide a documented way of getting Guile
> activated at all unless you are a 14th level system building
> magician.
I'll try to update the documentation, too.
> So the correct way is to continue _heeding_ GUILE_CONFIG
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> In addition, PKG_CONFIG_PATH is not documented in our configuration
>> or with ./configure --help.
>>
>> How to fix?
>
> I will take care of this. Reason is that in calls to `PKG_...`,
> `configure.ac` often uses the explicit argument `true`, which prevents
> the
David Kastrup writes:
> If I previously did
>
> GUILE_CONFIG=/usr/local/tmp/guile-1.8/bin/guile-config ./configure
> ./config.status --recheck
>
> then the Guile configuration was reused. If I now do
>
> PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/tmp/guile-1.8/lib/pkgconfig ./configure
> ./config.status
> In addition, PKG_CONFIG_PATH is not documented in our configuration
> or with ./configure --help.
>
> How to fix?
I will take care of this. Reason is that in calls to `PKG_...`,
`configure.ac` often uses the explicit argument `true`, which prevents
the creation of default actions. For
If I previously did
GUILE_CONFIG=/usr/local/tmp/guile-1.8/bin/guile-config ./configure
./config.status --recheck
then the Guile configuration was reused. If I now do
PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/tmp/guile-1.8/lib/pkgconfig ./configure
./config.status --recheck
the configuration information is
61 matches
Mail list logo
