[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: guile-2.0 and debian
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:34:05 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux)

Antonio Ospite <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 00:25:03 +0100
> Thomas Morley <address@hidden> wrote:
> [...]
>> Hi Antonio,
>> I figured to do a regtest-comparison between builds with guile 1.8.8
>> and guile 2.0.13:
>> For that I had to get back guile 1.8.8 and did a build from current master,
>> then I did 'make test-baseline'.
>> Then I copied the entire folder 'lilypond-git/build/input' elsewhere.
>> As second step I got guile 2.0.13 back
>> (Which is pretty tedious, because it's not in the distro, even not for
>> Ubuntu 16.10, if I'm not mistaken.)

Isn't 2.0.12 sufficient?

>> Did a build with your _previous_ patches. (Your mail with the new
>> patch-set came in while it was running already.)
>> Copied 'lilypond-git/build/input' back into the new build.
>> And did 'make check'
>> This is pretty tedious as well. Anyone with a better suggestion?
> You could install debian stable in a virtual machine.
> Or for a more lightweight approach you can create a debian stable tree
> using debootstrap and run a shell from it in a container with
> systemd-nspawn, this is what I did for my quick tests with guile-1.8.
> The same goes for people wanting to try lilypond with guile-2.0.13, in
> that case a debian unstable container is to be used.
> I can elaborate more if there is interest.

The question is whether it would make sense to temporarily base lilydev
on something with the necessary packages instead of vanilla Ubuntu.
There is a bit of impetus for getting a hold of the Guile-2.0 issue and
IĀ find that expanding the base of people willing to dig into matters
would be a useful thing.  It might also improve chances of getting
actual Guile developers touching our problem spaces.

Having the kind of work Thomas invests here be doable with straight
lilydev could draw some more participation.

And it's very likely to be an area of the "the last 10% take 90% of
fiddling" kind where "it almost works" is a good incentive for further

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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