Re: guile-2.0 and debian

[David Kastrup]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Antonio Ospite <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> 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]
>>> > https://ao2.it/tmp/lilypond-guile2/0005-Fix-ending-the-dynamic-extent-in-Text_interface-inte.patch
>>> 
>>> [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.
>
> Turns out that the commit message is a lot more work than the patch so
> I'll just keep yours around.
>
>> After this was fixed I noticed that I was getting the warnings in a
>> different order compared to what markup-cyclic-reference.ly 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.
>> https://ao2.it/tmp/lilypond-guile2/0006-Fix-the-expected-warning-with-guile-2-in-markup-cycl.patch
>
> I get the same warning here.  It's due to the previous warning's lack of
> proper cleanup: if you remove the first expect-warning and its trigger,
> this will also occur with current LilyPond.
>
> So I better change this in the same patch.

Pushed this to staging.  I have to apologize to the bug team for
bypassing procedures a lot these days, but this one is simple and I
can't really wait a lot for a drain of the pipeline if I want to get a
few things in shape before leaving.

-- 
David Kastrup