[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bug#1064998: guile-lib: broken package when cross building
From: |
Vagrant Cascadian |
Subject: |
Re: Bug#1064998: guile-lib: broken package when cross building |
Date: |
Fri, 01 Mar 2024 17:01:30 -0800 |
Forwarding this upstream, originally submitted in the Debian bug
tracking system at:
https://bugs.debian.org/1064998
On 2024-02-28, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> guile-lib actually does cross build, but we still track it as cross
> build failure, because the resulting package contains a build
> architecture multiarch tuple and that trips post-build sanity checks.
>
> The root cause of the failure lies in the way the ccache directory is
> determined. There are actually several ways this is being done during
> configure - some of which work correctly - and ultimately, the last
> attempt using GUILE_SITE_CCACHE_DIR gets to set the value wrongly.
> Surprisingly, there already is a more complete and working
> implementation GUILE_SITE_DIR and simply reusing that makes it compute
> the ccache directory correctly. Is the attached patch acceptable?
>
> Helmut
> --- guile-lib-0.2.7.orig/m4/guile-ext.m4
> +++ guile-lib-0.2.7/m4/guile-ext.m4
> @@ -63,12 +63,4 @@
> # The variable is marked for substitution, as by @code{AC_SUBST}.
> #
> AC_DEFUN([GUILE_SITE_CCACHE_DIR],
> - [AC_REQUIRE([GUILE_PROGS])
> - AC_MSG_CHECKING(for Guile site ccache directory)
> - GUILE_SITE_CCACHE=`$GUILE -c "(display (%site-ccache-dir))"`
> - if test "$GUILE_SITE_CCACHE" = ""; then
> - AC_MSG_FAILURE(site ccache dir not found)
> - fi
> - AC_MSG_RESULT($GUILE_SITE_CCACHE)
> - AC_SUBST(GUILE_SITE_CCACHE)
> - ])
> + [AC_REQUIRE([GUILE_SITE_DIR])])
Would the guile-lib developers consider merging this? Are there any
use-cases where this is inappropriate?
Thanks!
live well,
vagrant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: Bug#1064998: guile-lib: broken package when cross building,
Vagrant Cascadian <=