scsh-hackers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Scsh-hackers] scsh-packages first contact

To: Anthony Carrico <acarrico@memebeam.org>
Subject: Re: [Scsh-hackers] scsh-packages first contact
From: Michel Schinz <Michel.Schinz@epfl.ch>
Date: Mon Feb 9 11:27:06 2004
Cc: scsh-hackers <scsh-hackers@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-id: Discussion among the implementors <scsh-hackers.lists.sourceforge.net>
Sender: scsh-hackers-admin@lists.sourceforge.net
Le Lundi, 9 fév 2004, à 07:21 Europe/Zurich, Anthony Carrico a écrit :

On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 10:58:39AM +0100, Michel Schinz wrote:
Ok, so I added install-string exactly as you suggested.

Thank you, it works well. By the way, May I distribute install-lib
under the modified BSD license (as scsh and sunterlib)?

Yes, sure. I will try to clarify the license issues soon, but my plan is to use the modified BSD license anyway.

[...]

but clearly I'm going to need to do something more sophisticated to
deal with the relative directory issue. I'm sure it would be best if I
went through install-lib.scm to find out exactly what is happening,
but I'll ask you first, in case there is an quick/easy answer, since
my time seems short this month.

Well, that's an interesting case for sure. I don't have a quick answer right now, but some work definitely needs to be done on install-lib to support something like that. Until now, the code was written with the assumption that everything happened from within the package unpacking directory.

I'll look into this before the end of the week; maybe, as you suggest, just associating a working directory with each package is sufficient. Until then, I guess the easiest thing for you to do is to test the package definitions separately.

Michel.



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