Ludovic Courtès (2015-10-11 19:52 +0300) wrote:

> Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès (2015-10-09 15:40 +0300) wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> Can’t ‘sdl-union’ be used here?  I think it was created specifically to
>>> solve this problem.  (Currently it’s private to (gnu packages sdl) but
>>> you can export it.)
>>
>> Oh, great, I didn't know about it, thanks!  It will reduce the workaround.
>>
>> However, just using this package cannot solve the problem: 'sdl-config'
>> points directly to "/gnu/store/…-sdl-1.2.15", so you need to modify a
>> package anyway to make it find "/gnu/store/…-sdl-union-1.2.15/include/SDL"
>> (that's why 'guile-sdl' specifies "--with-sdl-prefix=").
>
> Oh.  :-/  Then I guess you can go with the original patch, which LGTM.

Actually, I think it will be more clear to use 'sdl-union' here, because
the workaround is more concise, WDYT?

The original workaround was: