[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install
From: |
Michele La Monaca |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install |
Date: |
Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:15:13 +0100 |
> Doesn't this create a bootstrapping problem while installing Chicken?
> Chicken needs a working install to install the runtime system, but
> your install needs the runtime system to be able to run...
If the build succeeds you have your runtime system under your feet. If
the build fails you've got nothing to install.
> This would be nice to have, indeed. But at what cost?
It does work, or it doesn't. I don't see any associated cost. Am I
missing anything?
> This seems unneccessary to me. A BSD install simply always overwrites
> a file (unless -b is given and it will unconditionally backup the file).
Correct. Not strictly necessary, but I would prefer to have that
feature (not overwriting a file if already installed and identical to
the source) rather than not.
Regards,
mikele
- [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install, Michele La Monaca, 2013/01/28
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install, Peter Bex, 2013/01/29
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install,
Michele La Monaca <=
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install, Jim Ursetto, 2013/01/29
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install, Michele La Monaca, 2013/01/29
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install, Peter Bex, 2013/01/29
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install, Felix, 2013/01/29
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install, Michele La Monaca, 2013/01/29
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A native scheme install, Jim Ursetto, 2013/01/29