Hi Vagrant, +CC David, which maintains Guile-Lib.
Vagrant Cascadian <vagr...@debian.org> writes: > 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? This looks reasonable to me. If I understand correctly, it makes use of the guile.m4 already provided macro (GUILE_SITE_DIR) instead of (poorly) implementing it as 'guile -c "(display (%site-ccache-dir))"'. -- Thanks, Maxim
