From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: Re: [1.9.12][OpenBSD] run time failure ... Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 22:26:15 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20100908192137.GH8535@x.lence.net> <20100908221255.GL8535@x.lence.net> <87fwxhb842.fsf@gnu.org> <87pqwi6eqq.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1284322994 12121 80.91.229.12 (12 Sep 2010 20:23:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 20:23:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-guile@gnu.org To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 12 22:23:13 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Out4y-0001Yc-HG for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 22:23:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48301 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Out4x-0006Sv-QQ for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:23:11 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35800 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Out4r-0006RM-Oh for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:23:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Out4q-0004Ok-Hp for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:23:05 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:41349 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Out4q-0004Og-E0; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:23:04 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED2C5D5ECB; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:23:03 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=q/woWL5Rcm7l /TaXG08CPOkMrV4=; b=XQ1k8iwTtOyCG229PeUU/QMEsnYYPHDEztR36QeZ/01H d8OJzd0SmZ5XGH+fitNdhLddnUnY01dbfsWWalIthk3z4eiRK0O4WMZiPOsunNrQ fiJlbbR2dtJY0SBPUcuaFmtHUFpDGvHBtLmsC7PzKiXk6yM5gd+I+a74ZeiDjpQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=lkgZtd oRI9HpAmjYrKKkafHwz5ceBTsh3NYS4pjjlxDDVtKmBaZPzQMFaaVVEsAEx7ORfO VAnDoC9bkslEXSck4gqnbE0JcceEQlZPRiqEI0/P6E8pw/gYM4kJMadpCCRG38HS lsOdRT1IVSHZKERMV+UcJ+G+AHeczpNjbfS68= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAA9BD5ECA; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:23:02 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [83.44.190.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3E942D5EC9; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:23:01 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87pqwi6eqq.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Sun, 12 Sep 2010 19:41:49 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 8B366538-BEAB-11DF-9B36-030CEE7EF46B-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:4806 Archived-At: Heya, On Sun 12 Sep 2010 19:41, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: >> This is a bit ridiculous. Let's just pull all that srfi C code into the >> core. > > Yes, but some projects might link directly against libguile-srfi-srfi*, > so we may need to keep them around (that was my thinking for SRFI-1.) You know what, I don't think we do. Currently to link to e.g. srfi-1, one needs to do a `-lguile-srfi-srfi-1-v-4'. guile-config doesn't provide this information, especially the "-v-4", and it isn't encoded anywhere within Guile as far as I can tell, and certainly not in the manual. I can't pull up any uses on any of the code search sites. So that means no one is using it. We may safely remove those libs, and those header files. I'm not usually so rash regarding removing interfaces, but I would be surprised if this affected anyone at all. Andy --=20 http://wingolog.org/