Am Freitag, dem 25.02.2022 um 00:08 +0100 schrieb Jean Abou Samra: > > > I read over this thread, but I don't understand what you mean by > > > "downstreams" here. > > > > In my understanding, it's about "downstreams" packaging LilyPond, > > including Linux distributions and parties like HomeBrew and MacPorts. > > But please ask Jean what exactly is required now: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2022-02/msg00123.html > > GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=1 is not just for us. The user can have it set > in their environment as a system configuration for all software that > happens to use Guile as well.
In my opinion, this is highly unlikely. If nothing is set, auto compilation is the default, only LilyPond chooses to soft-default to disable it (meaning it can be overwritten by explicitly setting the environment variable). I would doubt that anybody except you added to their environment by default. If they have, I maintain that it's their problem. There are far easier ways to shoot yourself into the foot. > > See https://gitlab.com/hahnjo/lilypond/-/commits/guile2-bytecode Let me > > know if this is miraculously sufficient to make people happy and I can > > open a merge request. > > I was going to write a longer reply before this came, but > this mostly obviates it. Am I understanding it correctly that > you can copy the bytecode from Linux binaries to cross-compiled > MingW ones even if this is not automated for now? That is my understanding and the claim I'm making since last year, but I haven't tested this yet. > If so, that clears my concerns. Just to be sure, can you be more precise here? Does it also clear the concerns about entirely dropping the code for Guile 1.8?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
