GNU bug report logs - #70065
[PATCH 0/6] gnu: Update to Racket 8.12, Chez Scheme 10, and Zuo 1.9.

Previous Next

Full log

Message #92 received at 70065 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
To: Philip McGrath <philip <at> philipmcgrath.com>, 70065 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Katherine Cox-Buday <cox.katherine.e+guix <at> gmail.com>,
 Andrew Tropin <andrew <at> trop.in>, Skyler Ferris <skyvine <at> protonmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] gnu: chez-scheme: Reorganize package definitions.
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2024 17:40:25 +0200

Am Montag, dem 01.04.2024 um 02:51 -0400 schrieb Philip McGrath:
> A future commit will change 'chez-scheme' to inherit from
> 'chez-scheme-for-racket', so 'chez-scheme-for-racket' will need to be
> defined before 'chez-scheme'.  In an attempt to produce better diffs,
> this commit re-orders the definitions while keeping their contents
> exactly the same.
> 
> * gnu/packages/chez.scm (chez-scheme): Move below
> 'chez-scheme-for-racket'.
> (chez-scheme-bootstrap-bootfiles): Move below
> 'chez-scheme-for-racket-bootstrap-bootfiles'.
> 
> Change-Id: Ie088abea2b44329f9d8399fbfb95c51d8912b05e
> ---
I don't understand this direction.  Why have chez-scheme inherit from
chez-scheme-for-racket?  Even if Racket itself pins a particular
version instead of an upstream release (which, let's face it, would be
the wiser option here), or requires a special build (again, why?) I
think keeping the inheritance in the other direction makes ontological
sense moreso than whatever we're starting here.

Cheers

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.