Re: Modified load-path proposal

[Neil Jerram]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Sorry, I'm not understanding how guilelibdir/guileobjectdir differ
>> from (2).
>
> You proposed a single M4 macro, `GUILE_SCHEME_DIR', which would provide
> the user with the ability to customize only *one* installation
> directory: the one were Scheme files will go.  In your scheme (as I
> understand it), the other directories (the one for shared objects in
> particular) are *imposed*: the user cannot change them.
>
> What I'm saying in (1) is that the user should be able to choose these
> two (or three) directories at installation time.

Perhaps, yes, but I don't (personally) want to get into the object/lib
file location debate yet, because I know very little about libtool and
other aspects of the issue, and because I believe that other Guile
developers believe that there are good reasons for the status quo.
Also it seems very unlikely that the outcome of that debate would
affect the details of a GUILE_SCHEME_DIR macro.

You're welcome to continue that debate, of course, but to be honest
it's probably better to wait until Marius and/or Rob have bandwidth to
describe the problems that they see with Vorfeed's "obvious" solution.

Regards,
        Neil