On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:14:20PM +0200, Christian Jaeger wrote :
$prefix/bin/{gsi-$version,gsc-$version}
Where will gsi-script and gsc-script be?
Well, there, with the version though. One may keep the names without versions as symlinks to the latest version.
Also, I'm missing where the "gsi" and "gsc" binaries/names will reside.
Just above, as explained
$prefix/lib/gambit-c/$version $prefix/doc/gambit-c/$version $prefix/share/gambit-c/$version $prefix/info/gambit-c/$version $prefix/include/gambit-c/$version
Why is this better than /usr/local/Gambit-C/$version/{lib,doc,info,include} ?
Because that's how the unix tradition is ! Almost all programs follow these rules (at least the fedora of the university, all all my BSD OSs). As the maintainer of gambit on FreeBSD, I'd like to follow this scheme (as Perl and TCL do among many others)
Debian does not seem to have a conflict of the gsi and gsc names with ghostscript so which OS'es do have one?
BSD's. Debian and Ubuntu are well spread, but far from being the only unices around. I tend to think that some other linuxes hava this conflict.
I'm using "~~/lib/_gambit#.scm" and "~~/lib/gambit#.scm" in a number of places. Also I guess a number of people are using "~~/syntax-case.scm" currently. If those are to be changed, what are the reasons and aims?
from "~~", it seems one can only access either syntax-case or lib. What's the point? Why not have them packaged together, and then, get rid of the "lib" part of this shortcut? I believe that it's the right thing to do to merge them. Then, it's just a matter of a sed one liner to fix all the programs (which anyway need to be stopped when upgrading to a newer version of gambit).
Christian.
Adrian