[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version.
From: |
rm |
Subject: |
Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version. |
Date: |
Fri, 2 Aug 2002 11:35:47 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.24i |
Hi Rob,
I feel sorry seeing that my complaints cause such a lot of trouble.
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 05:40:31PM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> Rob Browning <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > 1.5.7 was ready to go. However since I'm waiting to upload anyway
> > I'll go see how extensive the changes to fix it might be.
>
> OK, after looking in to it, it seems like we probably need a number of
> changes to get things "right". One of the main questions is how do
> you generate a header that can be included in the install tree
> containing info based on configure's results, but doesn't refer to any
> of those results (at least not to the generic names).
Hmm, i don't understand this. The offending header file is not generated
by 'autoheader', it's processed by 'configure'. Instead of writing a custom
c program that emits all needed #defines wouldn't it be sufficient to
create scmconfig.h.in by hand?
> After poking
> around a bit I propose the following solution:
>
> * change our configure generated header to be config.h via
> config.h.in as per the normal autoconf expectations and put it in
> the normal place ./config.h.in. This will now be a completely
> private header, not installed, and not included by anything but .c
> files.
Good idea, IMHO.
> [...]
> * add a rule to libguile/Makefile.am like this:
>
> scmconfig.h: ${builddir}/scmconfig-generate
> ${builddir}/scmconfig-generate > scmconfig.h.tmp
> mv scmconfig.h.tmp scmconfig.h
>
> * write libguile/scmconfig-generate.c to use the values in
> <config.h> to generate a config.h independent header like this:
>
> #include <config.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> int
> main (int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> printf(
> [...]
> This allows us to autogenerate the file from the contents of
> config.h without having to do anything too fancy with
> sed/config.status, etc.
>
> * go through and add items to scmconfig-generate.c as needed, but
> leave as much as possible in <config.h> -- where it'll be private.
> For example, I'm guessing that most of the HAVE_FOO macros won't
> be public, and the ones that must be public (i.e. in scmconfig.h)
> should be renamed to SCM_HAVE_FOO, or similar.
But if you want to select the values you want/need to export anyway,
why not use the autoconf machinery for that. Instead of putting these
values as string constants into a C program might as well have:
*----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| dnl file: public_defines.ac
| dnl This files describes the #defines detected
| dnl during libguile's build process that need to
| dnl be visible to users of the library.
|
| AC_PREREQ(2.53)
| AC_INIT
|
| AM_CONFIG_HEADER(libguile/scmconfig.h)
|
| AC_DEFINE(GUILE_DEBUG_FREELIST, 1,
| [Define this if you want to debug the free list (helps w/ GC bugs).])
| AC_DEFINE(GUILE ......
|
and then have it processed by autoheader with an invocation like this:
autoheader public_defines.ac
that's all that's needed, as far as i understand.
>
> But this looks like a non-trivial amount of work. I've already done
> all the steps but the last in a test tree, but that's the big one.
> So the question is, does this have to be done before 1.6.1?
May i offer my help?
Ralf Mattes
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., (continued)
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Rob Browning, 2002/08/01
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Sergey Poznyakoff, 2002/08/02
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Rob Browning, 2002/08/02
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Sergey Poznyakoff, 2002/08/02
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Bruce Korb, 2002/08/02
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Rob Browning, 2002/08/02
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Sergey Poznyakoff, 2002/08/03
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Bruce Korb, 2002/08/04
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Sergey Poznyakoff, 2002/08/04
Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Rob Browning, 2002/08/01
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version.,
rm <=
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., rm, 2002/08/02
- Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Rob Browning, 2002/08/02
Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version., Rob Browning, 2002/08/02