Re: config.status has been broken by issue 5780 "Accept GUILE 2 without extra configure options"

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:40 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld:
> Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > So I am reasonably confident that with some reasonably designed chunks
> > of code, we'd end up with comparatively small headaches in upkeep.  My
> > own gut feeling is that we'd not burn (or obstruct) any major bridges
> > supporting GUILE_CONFIG: if it is explicitly given, we don't really need
> > to check for versions or any other viability considerations: we can just
> > set the variables and be done.

Oh, turns out I need to strongly disagree with the last sentence: It's
probably not of concern right now, but if we ever were to require Guile
2.x (I hope we're going to, and not only with 2.24) we should throw a
hard error if a user presents us a guile-config from 1.8. Otherwise
there will be linker errors, which are much harder to diagnose.

Let me know if I'm missing something.

Jonas

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part