[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

From: Antonio Ospite
Subject: Re: guile-2.0 and debian
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 14:34:01 +0100

On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 14:07:08 +0100
David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:

> Antonio Ospite <address@hidden> writes:
> > For instance if David, or someone else, could confirm that patch 0005
> > [1] actually makes sense I would propose it for inclusion in lilypond.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >    Antonio
> >
> > [1]
> >
> [Forehead-slap] Looks like the right thing to do but it seems like
> moving it the scm_dynwind_end call before anything else is done might be
> better since non_fatal_error might cause a fatal error (depending on
> command line options) and I am not completely sure that a non-local C++
> exit will properly count as a non-local Scheme exit according to
> scm_dynwind_end's documentation.
> It's a non-brainer so I might just push a fix without further notice if
> it's ok with you that I'm stealing your credit in that manner.  If it's
> not ok, I'll get your patch and commit message and do that change with
> you as author.

Sure, if your change is different and better than mine, go a head and
take credit, maybe mention my name in the commit message, with something
like a Thanks-to or a Reported-by tag, but it's not a big deal.

After this was fixed I noticed that I was getting the warnings in a
different order compared to what was
expecting, see patch 0006[1]. I am not sure if this happens with
guile-1.8 too, so if you got the chance take a look at that too, please.

Thanks again,


Antonio Ospite

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

reply via email to

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