Pike-devel

pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se

3041 discussions

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Per Hedbor () ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

Well, debian is way less flexible. And you seem to be intentionally minsunderstandning things in texts we write. Pike modules are internal to the pike build process. / Per Hedbor () Previous text: >2004-01-26 21:27: >Subject: Re: Pike @ Debian >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 08:55:02PM +0100, Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum scribbled: >> >dynamic_module_makefile+specs, … [View More]aclocal.m4, precompile* and the headers must >> >_all_ go in separate directories. It doesn't seem there is a simple hack to >> >work around it. aclocal.m4 (as Martin already said) would have to be a) >> >cleaned up from the non-pike cruft, b) put in /usr/share/misc - >> >> Would it help it it was called something other than "aclocal.m4"? >> It's an internal file to the pike build system, so it's frankly only >> Pikes business what it contains. >Alas, it wouldn't... If some Pike C module runs aclocal it could pull in >both the pike's aclocal.m4 and other files with, possibly, macros that are >already defined in the pike's aclocal.m4 file. I doubt autoconf is smart >enough to cope with it ;) > >> > autoconf would find it there. >> >> autoconf is not _supposed_ to find it, except when pointed to it by >> the build system. The rules are internal and not useful in a >> stand-alone configure script. >Then putting it in a system-wide location is not justified. And its sole >existence outside the pike interpreter build process seems to be >questionable in that light... > >> Can you give some kind of motivation at to what benefit your "rules" >> bring to the user? They seem pretty pointless and anal to me. >First of all, they aren't mine. Second of all, they serve the purpose of >keeping the stuff where it belongs and where anyone can find it knowing only >the type of the resource they're looking for (e.g. autoconf macros -> >/usr/share/aclocal, C header files -> /usr/include/*, application specific >shareable stuff -> /usr/share/applicationname/*). It's in the Unix >spirit, according to LSB and done that way to faciliate sharing >architecture-independent stuff between machines on the LAN or WAN. All the >architecture-independent stuff goes in /usr/share which can be shared via >NFS accross the machines on your LAN. Anything that is not >architecture-independent must NOT go in /usr/share, obviously (so the Pike >.o files can't, for instance). > >> >No, the system is nowhere near flexible. It would be so much easier to >> >simply provide a pike.m4 file... >> >> I'd say Debian is much less flexible than the build system is. >Why didn't I expect a different conclusion? > >marek > > > > / Brevbäraren > [View Less]

1 0

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Per Hedbor () ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

Even pure C-modules generate .pmod files nowdays. Which is what I wrote, I think. / Per Hedbor () Previous text: >2004-01-26 21:21: >Subject: Re: Pike @ Debian >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 08:55:01PM +0100, Per Hedbor () @ Pike (-) developers forum scribbled: >> How can it save space? You really _do_ need pike to compile >The autobuilders work by keeping a minimum bootstrap filesystem in a chroot >or … [View More]

1 0

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Per Hedbor () ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

What's the point of a .m4-file with support for multiple pike versions (which would require an elaborate system to add macros, and support for having the same macro in different versions) instead of multiple files? One could of course have a pike.m4 along with a AC_PIKE_INIT() or so with only 'include(/usr/include/pike/VERSION/aclocal.m4)' as it's body. Where version is taken from the arguments, and some code in the beginning to select a suitable one (as in, the one that is called when … [View More]

1 1

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

>dynamic_module_makefile+specs, aclocal.m4, precompile* and the headers must >_all_ go in separate directories. It doesn't seem there is a simple hack to >work around it. aclocal.m4 (as Martin already said) would have to be a) >cleaned up from the non-pike cruft, b) put in /usr/share/misc - Would it help it it was called something other than "aclocal.m4"? It's an internal file to the pike build system, so it's frankly only Pikes business what it contains. > autoconf would … [View More]

1 0

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

_No_. It can _not_ be tailored to the distribution, because then the Pike modules you distribute could only be compiled with that distrubution. That would be totally useless. / Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) Previous text: >2004-01-26 20:48: >Subject: Re: Pike @ Debian >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 08:40:02PM +0100, Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum scribbled: >&… [View More]

1 0

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Per Hedbor () ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

How can it save space? You really _do_ need pike to compile pikemodules. Anything else is highly volatile, it's _extremely_ tough (although theoreticall possible) to dump .pmod files to .pmod.o without pike, but I would not attempt it (a pike module is always a .so and a .pmod nowdays, and the .pmod needs to be dumped). / Per Hedbor () Previous text: >2004-01-26 20:47: >Subject: Re: Pike @ Debian >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >On Mon, Jan … [View More]

1 0

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

You only have a single version of pike installed?? / Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) Previous text: >2004-01-26 20:48: >Subject: Re: Pike @ Debian >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 08:40:02PM +0100, Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum scribbled: >> Besides, even if you did a pike.m4, it would have to invoke pike with >> --show-paths or similar in order to find the files, since … [View More]

1 0

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

Besides, even if you did a pike.m4, it would have to invoke pike with --show-paths or similar in order to find the files, since J Random disribution might have moved them to god-knows-where. ;-) So you'd need to launch the pike interpreter anyway.

1 0

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

The main reason is that you can have several pikes installed or semi-installed. The -x module systems lets you start up any pike of your choice with any additional flags you might need, and get the module compiled for that exact environment. And if you have .cmod:s, you do need pike to build the module. / Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) Previous text: >2004-01-26 20:25: >Subject: Re: Pike @ Debian >-------------------------------------------------------------------- … [View More]

1 0

Re: Pike @ Debian
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

If master()->include_prefix points to the directory where the include files, dynamic_module_makefile, aclocal.m4 file, precompile.{pike,sh} files and specs file are, pike -x module should work yes. This is exactly what include_prefix is there for, and the only thing it is used for. / Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) Previous text: >2004-01-26 20:20: >Subject: Re: Pike @ Debian >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >On Mon, Jan 26, … [View More]

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Pike-devel