Re: 1.6.0 problems with libguilereadline-v-12 and fix

[prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc)]

Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org> wrote:
> Now one might argue that "make check" is not critical for readline
> (though I'd disagree), but I doubt anyone would argue that it's not
> critical for the other libraries, and so we have to be able to run
> from a non-install directory.  Of course there are other ways we could
> accomodate this need, and perhaps we should investigate those,

Here's one I like: <URL:http://cr.yp.to/slashpackage.html>.  This
system puts each installation of each package in its own directory, so
it's safe to install before testing.

I've been meaning to start promoting this to various GNU projects, but
I was going to wait until I got my build system (think autoconf) in
better shape so it would be less work for anyone who wants to convert.
(It also wouldn't hurt to get autoconf/automake on board before going
after anyone else.)  Adopting slashpackage means abandoning the FHS,
but if Guile wants to convert in spite of that, I'd be thrilled.
(Actually, you could maintain both traditional and slashpackage
versions, though I don't know how much extra work that would be.)

OT: naturally, I got impatient, and on my systems, every package is
already installed in its own directory, even the ones that aren't
designed for slashpackage.  I've started to make this into a
distribution: <URL:http://multivac.cwru.edu/sptools/>.  It still needs
lots of polish, and some critical pieces aren't publicly available
yet, but I think it's enough to show that a complete system can in
fact be built this way.


paul


_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
Guile-user@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user