how to manage 2 guile version

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

how to manage 2 guile version

marco atzeri-4
I was thinking to pack the last guile-2.0.x
however this will require the repack of 1.8.8
version.

No problem for the headers as they are
properly isolated

/usr/include/guile/1.8/libguile/__scm.h
/usr/include/guile/1.8/libguile.h

but what to do of
/usr/lib/libguile.dll.a

relocate it somewhere like

/usr/lib/guile/1.8/libguile.dll.a

Other suggestion/preference ?

Regards
Marco


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

Yaakov Selkowitz
On 2016-07-14 15:13, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> I was thinking to pack the last guile-2.0.x
> however this will require the repack of 1.8.8
> version.

Yes, that would be a good idea at this point.

> No problem for the headers as they are
> properly isolated
>
> /usr/include/guile/1.8/libguile/__scm.h
> /usr/include/guile/1.8/libguile.h
>
> but what to do of
> /usr/lib/libguile.dll.a

Leave it; the new version is named libguile-2.0.dll.a.

> Other suggestion/preference ?

https://github.com/cygwinports/guile
https://github.com/cygwinports/guile1.8

(Those haven't been updated in a while, so they may need version/release
bumps.)

--
Yaakov

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

marco atzeri-4


On 14/07/2016 23:29, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:

> On 2016-07-14 15:13, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>> I was thinking to pack the last guile-2.0.x
>> however this will require the repack of 1.8.8
>> version.
>
> Yes, that would be a good idea at this point.
>
>> No problem for the headers as they are
>> properly isolated
>>
>> /usr/include/guile/1.8/libguile/__scm.h
>> /usr/include/guile/1.8/libguile.h
>>
>> but what to do of
>> /usr/lib/libguile.dll.a
>
> Leave it; the new version is named libguile-2.0.dll.a.
>
>> Other suggestion/preference ?
>
> https://github.com/cygwinports/guile
> https://github.com/cygwinports/guile1.8
>
> (Those haven't been updated in a while, so they may need version/release
> bumps.)
>

thanks

2.0.12 build fine, I need just to look on some test failures

00-socket.test  seems to cause a segfault.

Regards
Marco
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

Yaakov Selkowitz
On 2016-07-17 12:01, Marco Atzeri wrote:

> On 14/07/2016 23:29, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>> https://github.com/cygwinports/guile
>> https://github.com/cygwinports/guile1.8
>>
>> (Those haven't been updated in a while, so they may need version/release
>> bumps.)
>
> thanks
>
> 2.0.12 build fine, I need just to look on some test failures
>
> 00-socket.test  seems to cause a segfault.

Ping?

--
Yaakov
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

marco atzeri-4
On 28/03/2017 04:15, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:

> On 2016-07-17 12:01, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>> On 14/07/2016 23:29, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>>> https://github.com/cygwinports/guile
>>> https://github.com/cygwinports/guile1.8
>>>
>>> (Those haven't been updated in a while, so they may need version/release
>>> bumps.)
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> 2.0.12 build fine, I need just to look on some test failures
>>
>> 00-socket.test  seems to cause a segfault.
>
> Ping?
>
Last week I was planning to just release guile-2.0.14,
but while the test of guile itself is almost fine I noticed an issue
when building "make" with it.

Only tested on 64 bits, 'make check' of make fails on all guile tests
-------------------------------------------
functions/guile .........................................
Test timed out after 5 seconds
Error running ../make (expected 0; got 14): ../make -f
work/functions/guile.mk

Caught signal 14!

Test timed out after 5 seconds
Error running ../make (expected 0; got 14): ../make -f
work/functions/guile.mk.1

Caught signal 14!

Test timed out after 5 seconds
Error running ../make (expected 0; got 14): ../make -f
work/functions/guile.mk.2
--------------------------------------------------

no real time in the next month to chase it.

As I am on the road and upload is not working on my
website, I am attaching the latest cygport and patch file
just in case you or some else would like to check.

Regards
Marco


guile.cygport (2K) Download Attachment
test-ffi.patch (882 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

szgyg-2
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 07:50:43AM +0200, Marco Atzeri wrote:

> On 28/03/2017 04:15, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>> On 2016-07-17 12:01, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>>> 2.0.12 build fine, I need just to look on some test failures
>>>
>>> 00-socket.test  seems to cause a segfault.
>
> Last week I was planning to just release guile-2.0.14,
> but while the test of guile itself is almost fine I noticed an issue
> when building "make" with it.
>
> Only tested on 64 bits, 'make check' of make fails on all guile tests
> [...]
> no real time in the next month to chase it.

FWIW guile 2.2.0 was released two weeks ago [0]. Mostly works, but it
still has failing tests [1].

szgyg

[0] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2017-03/msg00095.html
[1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2017-03/msg00066.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

Yaakov Selkowitz
In reply to this post by marco atzeri-4
On 2017-03-28 00:50, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> Last week I was planning to just release guile-2.0.14,
> but while the test of guile itself is almost fine I noticed an issue
> when building "make" with it.
>
> Only tested on 64 bits, 'make check' of make fails on all guile tests

WFM:

[snip]
functions/guile ......................................... ok     (7 passed)
[snip]
572 Tests in 117 Categories Complete ... No Failures :-)

--
Yaakov
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

marco atzeri-4
On 28/03/2017 17:34, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:

> On 2017-03-28 00:50, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>> Last week I was planning to just release guile-2.0.14,
>> but while the test of guile itself is almost fine I noticed an issue
>> when building "make" with it.
>>
>> Only tested on 64 bits, 'make check' of make fails on all guile tests
>
> WFM:
>
> [snip]
> functions/guile ......................................... ok     (7 passed)
> [snip]
> 572 Tests in 117 Categories Complete ... No Failures :-)
>

Than is the Symantec annoying me again.
I will check in Safe mode without AV.

Thanks
Marco
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

Yaakov Selkowitz
In reply to this post by szgyg-2
On 2017-03-28 02:11, szgyg wrote:
> FWIW guile 2.2.0 was released two weeks ago [0]. Mostly works, but it
> still has failing tests [1].

Oh, great...

So we probably should take this into consideration *now*, even though
most guile consumers aren't ready for the changes in 2.2 yet.

Fortunately, it seems guile itself has taken their own instability into
account:

https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Parallel-Installations.html

Although looking at packages which use guile, most haven't fully adapted
to this yet (guile-config is still used by some, and it doesn't seem
anyone is using pkg-config to find guile and guild), so we still need to
provide unversioned binaries/scripts in /usr/bin for now.

It's way too early to make 2.2 "the" guile, so I think we stick with a
versioned guile1.8 for the stragglers, and 'guile' being 2.0 for now,
but eventually transitioning to a versioned 'guile2.0'.  We'll have to
take another look at this once the real world has adapted to 2.2.

--
Yaakov
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

Yaakov Selkowitz
In reply to this post by marco atzeri-4
On 2017-03-28 11:00, Marco Atzeri wrote:

> On 28/03/2017 17:34, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>> On 2017-03-28 00:50, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>>> Last week I was planning to just release guile-2.0.14,
>>> but while the test of guile itself is almost fine I noticed an issue
>>> when building "make" with it.
>>>
>>> Only tested on 64 bits, 'make check' of make fails on all guile tests
>>
>> WFM:
>
> Than is the Symantec annoying me again.
> I will check in Safe mode without AV.

I have updated my proposed changes:

https://github.com/cygwinports/guile
https://github.com/cygwinports/guile1.8

--
Yaakov
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

marco atzeri-4
In reply to this post by Yaakov Selkowitz
On 28/03/2017 18:01, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:

> On 2017-03-28 02:11, szgyg wrote:
>> FWIW guile 2.2.0 was released two weeks ago [0]. Mostly works, but it
>> still has failing tests [1].
>
> Oh, great...
>
> So we probably should take this into consideration *now*, even though
> most guile consumers aren't ready for the changes in 2.2 yet.
>
> Fortunately, it seems guile itself has taken their own instability into
> account:
>
> https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Parallel-Installations.html
>
>
> Although looking at packages which use guile, most haven't fully adapted
> to this yet (guile-config is still used by some, and it doesn't seem
> anyone is using pkg-config to find guile and guild), so we still need to
> provide unversioned binaries/scripts in /usr/bin for now.
>
> It's way too early to make 2.2 "the" guile, so I think we stick with a
> versioned guile1.8 for the stragglers, and 'guile' being 2.0 for now,
> but eventually transitioning to a versioned 'guile2.0'.  We'll have to
> take another look at this once the real world has adapted to 2.2.
>

Considering some are still straggling on the 1.8 to 2.0 conversion,
2.2 is for far future.

Do you think we need to maintain 1.8 around ?
Debian seems to have drop it.


regards
Marco
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

Yaakov Selkowitz
On 2017-03-28 14:50, Marco Atzeri wrote:

> On 28/03/2017 18:01, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>> On 2017-03-28 02:11, szgyg wrote:
>>> FWIW guile 2.2.0 was released two weeks ago [0]. Mostly works, but it
>>> still has failing tests [1].
>>
>> Oh, great...
>>
>> So we probably should take this into consideration *now*, even though
>> most guile consumers aren't ready for the changes in 2.2 yet.
>>
>> Fortunately, it seems guile itself has taken their own instability into
>> account:
>>
>> https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Parallel-Installations.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Although looking at packages which use guile, most haven't fully adapted
>> to this yet (guile-config is still used by some, and it doesn't seem
>> anyone is using pkg-config to find guile and guild), so we still need to
>> provide unversioned binaries/scripts in /usr/bin for now.
>>
>> It's way too early to make 2.2 "the" guile, so I think we stick with a
>> versioned guile1.8 for the stragglers, and 'guile' being 2.0 for now,
>> but eventually transitioning to a versioned 'guile2.0'.  We'll have to
>> take another look at this once the real world has adapted to 2.2.
>
> Considering some are still straggling on the 1.8 to 2.0 conversion,
> 2.2 is for far future.

Far enough that we need 2.0 right now.

> Do you think we need to maintain 1.8 around ?

Based on Fedora's use of each, of the Cygwin packages currently
requiring libguile17, at least lilypond and TeXmacs seem not to be
compatible with 2.0.  There are also a few others in Fedora but not in
Cygwin (coot, drgeo, gnurobots, trackballs).  So I think it needs to
stay, at least for now.

> Debian seems to have drop it.

Indeed, although they did so only by bundling guile-1.8 with the
lilypond source package, attempting to patch some for 2.0 (which doesn't
always work well), and dropping the rest.  I much prefer Fedora's
approach of parallel-installing both.

--
Yaakov
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

marco atzeri-4
In reply to this post by Yaakov Selkowitz
On 28/03/2017 18:08, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:

> On 2017-03-28 11:00, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>> On 28/03/2017 17:34, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>>> On 2017-03-28 00:50, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>>>> Last week I was planning to just release guile-2.0.14,
>>>> but while the test of guile itself is almost fine I noticed an issue
>>>> when building "make" with it.
>>>>
>>>> Only tested on 64 bits, 'make check' of make fails on all guile tests
>>>
>>> WFM:
>>
>> Than is the Symantec annoying me again.
>> I will check in Safe mode without AV.
>
> I have updated my proposed changes:
>
> https://github.com/cygwinports/guile
> https://github.com/cygwinports/guile1.8

Hi Yaakov,
thanks. The issue for make was in the lack of
2.0.9-module-ldflags.patch.
With that "make check" has no issue on guile test.

I am making minor change to your proposal for package names;
for 2.0 we have libguile2.0-devel so for 1.8 I am using
libguile1.8-devel instead of libguile-devel and
current guile-devel is obsoleted by libguile2.0-devel.

I will upload as soon I complete the build for both arch.

Regards
Marco








Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: how to manage 2 guile version

Yaakov Selkowitz
On 2017-04-01 07:30, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> thanks. The issue for make was in the lack of
> 2.0.9-module-ldflags.patch.
> With that "make check" has no issue on guile test.

That's because libguilereadline-* is a module, and without linking it
with -module, cygport removes the .la file needed to load it (since
guile uses ltdl).  That's also the reason for KEEP_LA_FILES=module.

> I am making minor change to your proposal for package names;
> for 2.0 we have libguile2.0-devel so for 1.8 I am using
> libguile1.8-devel instead of libguile-devel and
> current guile-devel is obsoleted by libguile2.0-devel.

Fair enough.

> I will upload as soon I complete the build for both arch.

Which you've already done.  Thanks!

--
Yaakov
Loading...