[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Modified load-path proposal
From: |
Vorfeed Canal |
Subject: |
Re: Modified load-path proposal |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Oct 2005 01:24:23 +0400 |
On 18 Oct 2005 12:16:05 -0400, Greg Troxel <address@hidden> wrote:
> That all sounds fine, except that I think (policy!) we should either
> discourage putting stuff under 1.6, or suggest 1.6/site, so that
> guile's own files and other stuff are cleanly separated. I agree that
> mechanism sufficient for various policies is the key point, but think
> we also need to suggest sane behavior to avoid future messes to be
> backwards-compat with.
Why not just use Python way ?
/usr/share/guile-1.6/site - for third-party packages
/usr/share/guile-1.6 - for basic guile packages
Right now GUILE_SITE_DIR is defined as
AC_DEFUN([GUILE_SITE_DIR],
[AC_REQUIRE([GUILE_PROGS])dnl
AC_MSG_CHECKING(for Guile site directory)
GUILE_SITE=`[$GUILE_CONFIG] info pkgdatadir`/site
AC_MSG_RESULT($GUILE_SITE)
AC_SUBST(GUILE_SITE)
])
This means existing packages will install into <somewhere>/site no
matter what - it's too late to change it.
P.S. This is why I think this stuff is important and was actually
dumbfound when found it's not solved yet for C libraries: this IS
policy. More: it's policy embedded in thousands of places (today may
be in tens, not thousands - but this is only since few people are
interested in guile and its extensions and this problem, not a
solution). It's almost impossible to change it later: whatever will be
decided will stuck for a long-long time.
- Re: Search path for C libraries, (continued)
- Re: Search path for C libraries, Vorfeed Canal, 2005/10/18
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Neil Jerram, 2005/10/17
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/18
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Neil Jerram, 2005/10/19
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Vorfeed Canal, 2005/10/20
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/20
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Neil Jerram, 2005/10/20
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/21
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Neil Jerram, 2005/10/17
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Greg Troxel, 2005/10/18
- Re: Modified load-path proposal,
Vorfeed Canal <=
- Re: Modified load-path proposal, Neil Jerram, 2005/10/19