[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ?
From: |
Hans Aberg |
Subject: |
Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ? |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:46:34 +0100 |
On 25 Feb 2011, at 12:07, Andy Wingo wrote:
>> * Developers should be clearly warned that -I/usr/local/include
>> needs to be after all other -I options, due to guile
>> header naming conflicts.
>
> This is incorrect. Guile 2.0 (and later) does not add
> -I/usr/local/include to the CFLAGS in any configuration. If you install
> to /usr/local, it adds -I/usr/local/include/guile/2.0, or /2.2, etc.
I get:
$ guile-config compile
-D_THREAD_SAFE -I/usr/local/include/guile/2.0 -I/usr/local/include
> The problem this thread is about is if you have Guile 1.8 or previous
> eheaders installed in /usr.
The directory /usr/local/include/ is added by the compiler. So possibly, if one
has the 1.8 header, it will be included even when using `guile-config compile`.
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil ?, (continued)
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil ?, Hans Aberg, 2011/02/22
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil ?, nalaginrut, 2011/02/22
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil ?, Hans Aberg, 2011/02/22
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil ?, Ken Raeburn, 2011/02/22
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ?, Bruce Korb, 2011/02/23
- scm_listofnull, Ludovic Courtès, 2011/02/23
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ?, Ken Raeburn, 2011/02/24
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ?, Bruce Korb, 2011/02/24
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ?, Andy Wingo, 2011/02/25
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ?, Andy Wingo, 2011/02/25
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ?,
Hans Aberg <=
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ?, Andy Wingo, 2011/02/25
- Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil -- et al. ?, Hans Aberg, 2011/02/25
Re: SCM_BOOL_T became #nil ?, Mark H Weaver, 2011/02/22