From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: Re: libffi cannot be installed in user profile in core-updates Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:15:03 -0400 Message-ID: <87a9cflovc.fsf@yeeloong.lan> References: <87ior4ku41.fsf@yeeloong.lan> <53300074.6070904@totakura.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38034) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WS4ky-0000IH-JN for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:18:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WS4jF-0008Bk-9J for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:16:17 -0400 Received: from world.peace.net ([96.39.62.75]:60255) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WS4jF-0008Bb-3n for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:15:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: <53300074.6070904@totakura.in> (Sree Harsha Totakura's message of "Mon, 24 Mar 2014 10:52:52 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: sreeharsha@totakura.in Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Sree Harsha Totakura writes: > On 03/24/2014 07:07 AM, Mark H Weaver wrote: >> This problem was introduced in d43547f12d4eae19845f3bf13a53a050af965063 >> "gnu: libffi: Leave a copy of headers where libffi.pc expects them." > > What we need to do here is to symlink the header files instead of the include > directory. This was suggested earlier here: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2014-01/msg00213.html > > Ludo, please revert d43547f12d4eae19845f3bf13a53a050af965063. Another option is to improve union.scm so that symlinks to directories within the store are treated the same as directories. IMO this is a better approach. I intend to rewrite union.scm quite soon anyway, along the lines described in the "Optimizing union.scm" thread, unless there are objections or better ideas. Mark