guile-gtk-general
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 2.7.90 released


From: Andy Wingo
Subject: Re: 2.7.90 released
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 22:40:20 +0200

Hi Greg,

If you're still interested in this, maybe you can take a look at making
a patch. The (gnome gobject) modules are fixed, but g-wrap needs help to
load the lib from the right path. Look at g-wrap/guile.scm in the g-wrap
distro -- it will need hacking, and some interface need changing to
allow a destination-dir argument to be passed around.

Of course, Rotty is the g-wrap maintainer, so you should talk to him.

Regards,

Wingo.


On Sat, 2004-10-16 at 19:07 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> I should also say thank you to Andreas, who has been helping me both
> on and off list.
> 
> Earlier I wrote:
> 
>   gdt 708 ~ > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/y0/lib guile
>   guile> (use-modules (gnome gobject))
> 
> In my view, a package that needs to load its own files at runtime, of
> whatever sort, should look for them in the prefix with which it was
> configured.  Without LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/y0/lib, I get
> 
>   guile> (use-modules (gnome gobject))
>   /usr/pkg/share/guile/gnome/gobject/gtype.scm:102:15: In procedure 
> dynamic-link in expression (dynamic-link "libguile-gnome-gobject"):
>   /usr/pkg/share/guile/gnome/gobject/gtype.scm:102:15: file: 
> "libguile-gnome-gobject", message: "can't open the module"
>   ABORT: (misc-error)
> 
>   Type "(backtrace)" to get more information or "(debug)" to enter the 
> debugger.
>   guile>
> 
> If the dynamic-link had called (string-append (gobject-prefix) "/lib/"
> "libguile-gnome-gobject") instead, I think this would have worked out
> fine:
> 
>   guile> (dynamic-link (string-append "/usr/y0/lib/" 
> "libguile-gnome-gobject"))  
>   #<dynamic-object "/usr/y0/lib/libguile-gnome-gobject">
> 
> I realize this is a semi-religious issue, as it would seem that
> Debian's objection to -rpath would apply here as well.  I don't
> understand the anti---rpath argument, but this is different in that
> the prefix is only used for hte file in question, and isn't part of a
> search path.  But I suppose this could be a configure-time option, so
> that both camps could have it installed as they like it.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 
-- 
Andy Wingo <address@hidden>
http://ambient.2y.net/wingo/




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]