[gnutls-dev] Guile related 'make install' failure
ludo at gnu.org
Wed Jun 27 23:21:04 CEST 2007
Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org> writes:
> Right, it is the same problem as for perl, python, emacs etc and other
> similar systems that use a local package repository. I think the best
> we can do is to offer these options:
> 1: Install GnuTLS guile bindings under our $prefix, and ask users to put
> the directory in their load-path.
> 2: Ask users to configure using
> --with-guile-site-dir=/usr/share/guile/site and getting the proper
> rights to that directory.
The idea of having something that purposefully fails by default seems
> 3: Ask users to build using --prefix=/usr
Why? Isn't it equivalent to removing the `--prefix' option altogether?
> 4: Ask users to get their package built from some distribution that does
> the right thing (--prefix=/usr).
> The majority of users will do #4
> Do you think we could add something about this to the manual? How would
> a user append the load-path in Guile? There is no 'load-path'
> variable... Maybe an example would be useful.
It's called `%load-path':
Rather than writing a Scheme snipped that modifies `%load-path', people
would rather change the `GUILE_LOAD_PATH' environment variable or add
`-L' switches to the Guile command-line. Having to do one of these is
not convenient, though.
What I initially did was to add `--with-guile-site-dir'. Its purpose
1. Allow `distcheck' to work, by automatically using it (through
2. Allow users who really don't want to install to `$(GUILE_SITE)' and
who know what they are doing to specify another installation
Doesn't it seem reasonable? Perhaps `--with-guile-site-dir' should be
mentioned in the manual?
> Generally, I think it would be nice if Guile was changed to look into
> /usr/local/share/guile/site as well.
Hmm, not sure if that would help much. And then why not
`/opt/guile/site' as well, or `/gnu/guile/site', etc.?
More information about the Gnutls-devel