chicken-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] depreciating CHICKEN_HOME


From: Brandon J. Van Every
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] depreciating CHICKEN_HOME
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 15:06:21 -0700
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516)

felix winkelmann wrote:
On 6/9/06, Brandon J. Van Every <address@hidden> wrote:
Is the msvc vcbuild.bat version of Chicken the only one that relies on
CHICKEN_HOME?  If so, I suggest it be depreciated for all other
installations.  If we've gone to the trouble of hardwiring a bunch of
directories for csc.exe, I don't see why CHICKEN_HOME should have the
right to mess them up.  Unless I'm missing something about how
CHICKEN_HOME is actually used by people.  In the sources, it looks like
a hack to allow vcbuild.bat to install in a flat directory when everyone
else has a hierarchical directory structure.


Sorry, I can't follow this at all: vcbuild.bat doesn't use CHICKEN_HOME,
also makefile.vc doesn't. For Windows platforms built via makefile.vc, csc.scm uses CHICKEN_HOME, as this seems to be the only decent way of specifiying an installation destination.

What I mean is, csc built from vcbuild.bat or makefile.vc relies on a hardwired behavior for CHICKEN_HOME. ./configure builds and installations do not appear to depend on CHICKEN_HOME for anything, either at build time or runtime, although I could be mistaken.

If you do it through cmake, we can (and should) change
csc.scm.in to use the configured destination instead of CHICKEN_HOME.


I'm working on it. It is like excising a cancer. See my post about Windows pathnames.


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]