Ben Woodcroft b.woodcr...@uq.edu.au writes:
On 21/06/15 14:41, Mark H Weaver wrote:
Is there any reason to build the single-threaded version? Maybe it
would be better to omit it, and call the multi-threaded version
FastTree. What do you think?
I considered this. I have only ever used the
Another patch attached, with the only difference being the brackets not
on a new line.
On 21/06/15 14:41, Mark H Weaver wrote:
Is there any reason to build the single-threaded version? Maybe it
would be better to omit it, and call the multi-threaded version
FastTree. What do you think?
I
Hi Ben,
Instead of using 'trivial-build-system' for this, it would be better to
use 'gnu-build-system' and remove/replace the phases that aren't
appropriate. So, you'll probably want to remove the 'configure' phase
and replace the 'build' and 'install' phases.
Even so, there are many important
On 21/06/15 03:17, Mark H Weaver wrote:
Hi Ben,
Instead of using 'trivial-build-system' for this, it would be better to
use 'gnu-build-system' and remove/replace the phases that aren't
appropriate. So, you'll probably want to remove the 'configure' phase
and replace the 'build' and 'install'
Ben Woodcroft b.woodcr...@uq.edu.au writes:
Updated patch attached.
Much better, thanks!
In answer to my own question
During development of this patch I noticed badly specified system*
does not throw an error - is there a way to do this so?
One way is to replace system* with (zero?
On 20/06/15 08:30, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
On 19/06/15 20:13, Alex Kost wrote:
Ben Woodcroft (2015-06-19 10:24 +0300) wrote:
Hi,
Hi, I didn't try your patch, so I don't have real comments, just some
general cosmetic notes, if you don't mind.
Thanks, all help appreciated. Updated patch
Hi,
I was a bit confused the best way to package FastTree as it is so simple
- the install instructions just give how to run gcc and I couldn't find
anything similar (enough for me) in other .scm files.
I'm also not clear which version of gcc should be chosen - I chose 5.1
as it was new,
Ben Woodcroft (2015-06-19 10:24 +0300) wrote:
Hi,
Hi, I didn't try your patch, so I don't have real comments, just some
general cosmetic notes, if you don't mind.
[...]
+ (source (origin
+ (method url-fetch)
+ (uri (string-append
+
