On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:05:18PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 08:11:08PM +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado > wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 07:17:33PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 06:24:22PM +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado > > > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 05:24:53PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 04:03:43PM +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero > > > > > Hurtado wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:11:26AM +0300, Lars Engblom wrote: > > > > > > > I have been testing this on amd64 after time_t switch. It works > > > > > > > well. I tested even some date functions in racket/date. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it ready to be included in ports? > > > > > > > > > > > > Racket has been ready for months but summer isn't the best season > > > > > > in the > > > > > > open source world. > > > > > > > > > > PFRAG.i386 and PFRAG.amd64 make no sense, there are lots of common > > > > > files > > > > > there, and nothing seems arch-dependent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > It makes sense. The files in PFRAG.* are generated from the source of > > > > the scribble docs (also the png files). There is a bug in the source and > > > > racket doesn't generate all files on i386, the file list is different > > > > between i386 and amd64. The files are named with consecutive numbers, so > > > > the content is different in some files despite of the same filename. > > > > > > > > The easiest workaround is to trim the directory from PLIST and to use > > > > PFRAG.*. I reported the bug to the doc author in February but he > > > > never replied my mail. > > > > > > All the common parts from PFRAG.* should go to PLIST to actually make > > > sense. Noone cares about the content/cksum at that step.. since there > > > are more files in PFRAG.amd64, PFRAG.i386 should be merged to PLIST, and > > > PFRAG.amd64 should only contain the list of images thare are only > > > present there. But still, this is a gross use of PFRAG imo. > > > > > > > I know my use of PFRAG is gross, I'm not proud of this :P . Thanks for > > the help. > > > > I've followed your advices and now the port only uses a minimal > > PFRAG.amd64. Attached the tarball with the changes (untested). > > That looks a bit better :) > > lib/libracket3m.so handling seems wrong, it should be properly > versionned within the ports infrastructure (if things are supposed to be > linked with it) and there shouldnt be a -5.3.6.so file (symlink ?) > Why isnt there an @lib annotation for it ? >
I thought the lib was only for internal use but I was wrong. I'm reading the docs and it's possible to embed racket in other applications. I'll fix the problem this week. -- Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado http://juanfra.info
