[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: chicken scheme
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: chicken scheme |
Date: |
Fri, 01 Jul 2016 11:39:30 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) |
John J Foerch <address@hidden> skribis:
> address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> I don't have enough experience with guix to give definite advice on
> this, but chicken does present a couple of unique issues. I think that
> having gcc available is essential to chicken's purpose, as one is not
> likely to only use the interpreter. Installing extensions requires C
> compilation, and if one is not installing extensions and not using
> chicken's compiler, then one might as well be using any old scheme off
> the street ;-)
Right, makes sense. :-)
> If the gcc-toolchain were kept in reference (but not in the profile),
> that may be enough. The chicken compiler has options (and/or
> environment variables) to use another gcc if desired, so people who want
> to use another gcc than the one used to build chicken can still do so.
OK. Then I guess we should adjust our ‘chicken’ package so that it
hard-codes the absolute file name of ‘gcc’ and ‘ld’. Would you like to
give it a try?
> Some chicken extensions install executable programs (for example
> hyde). On other OSes they would normally be installed to
> /usr/local/bin. Obviously this would be different for guix.
This part doesn’t sound Guix-dependent. It’s more about whether
non-root users can install to, say, ~/.local, or whether only root can
install (to /usr/local/bin or similar.) WDYT?
Thanks,
Ludo’.
- Re: chicken scheme,
Ludovic Courtès <=