scsh-hackers
[Top] [All Lists]

[Scsh-hackers] Packaging proposal text docs

To: scsh-hackers@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Scsh-hackers] Packaging proposal text docs
From: Eric Knauel <knauel@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>
Date: Mon Jan 26 04:21:36 2004
List-id: Discussion among the implementors <scsh-hackers.lists.sourceforge.net>
Sender: scsh-hackers-admin@lists.sourceforge.net
Hi,

While converting scsh-yp to meet the demands of the packaging
proposal, I stumpled accross two things:

 - I think packages should be allowed to provide documentation in form
   of pure text files.

 - I think there is a need for some machinery that helps to bring
   information acquired during the `./configure'-step back into the
   scope of pkg-def.scm.  Load.scm, for example, should not hardcode
   the shared module extension to ".so", that's wrong on some
   platforms.  (It's not clear to me whether this is only a cosmetical
   problem and or if it's harming functionality.)  However, configure
   finds out about the correct extension and it would be smartish if
   the Packaging proposal describes a method for accessing arbitrary
   information from configure.

   Here's what I did scsh-yp (see the CVS version) so far: configure
   creates a config-data.scm from a template config-data.scm.in (which
   is basically an alist written to a file with scsh's READ/WRITE).
   Pkg-def.scm then READs that file and the information from that
   list.  Uhm, well, probably a hack, comments welcome!

-Eric
-- 
"Excuse me --- Di Du Du Duuuuh Di Dii --- Huh Weeeheeee" (Albert King)

Attachment: pgpVNMbt0BLHC.pgp
Description: PGP signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>