From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: guile build failure - help ! Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:10:15 +0100 Message-ID: <874p1wk9ew.fsf@gnu.org> References: <6.0.1.1.2.20081119180113.01e172f8@pop.nadler.com> <49dd78620811201554l1f9e6b73w41aaa9072f3086c8@mail.gmail.com> <87tz9wvouj.fsf@gnu.org> <49dd78620811241327t1dabe97bwcc16b1fc3a5d8128@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1227568249 22206 80.91.229.12 (24 Nov 2008 23:10:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:10:49 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 25 00:11:51 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1L4kao-0002N4-QC for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:11:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49305 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L4kZf-0002PA-8d for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:10:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L4kZY-0002LL-Jf for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:10:28 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L4kZW-0002Iv-LA for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:10:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47119 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L4kZW-0002Ii-FU for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:10:26 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:33021 helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L4kZV-0000hJ-Rd for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:10:26 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1L4kZS-0004go-DR for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:10:22 +0000 Original-Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:10:22 +0000 Original-Received: from ludo by reverse-83.fdn.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:10:22 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 22 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: reverse-83.fdn.fr X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 5 Frimaire an 217 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: i686-pc-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:8DXQLoqKMhahI8THHE0rpWwIyF4= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:7890 Archived-At: Hi! "Neil Jerram" writes: > Surely - if we build the distro with 2.2, and then a user tries to > build with 1.5.26 - we will then get a definition of > lt__PROGRAM__LTX_preloaded_symbols in the autogenerated code > (guileS.o), and a reference from guile.c to lt_preloaded_symbols. And > hence still an unresolved external? By "building", you mean re-running `libtoolize', e.g., via `autoreconf'. If by "building" we just mean running "./configure && make install", then it's really compatible (Libtool is just a script that's bundled with the tarball). Now, it looks like `configure.in' will need to be changed incompatibly, which means that developers will all have to switch to 2.2. It's annoying, but probably a reasonable thing to ask. What do you think? Thanks, Ludo'.