Guile 1.8 vs 2.0 (was: Re: building from source.)

[John Ralls]

On Nov 12, 2013, at 12:55 AM, Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be> wrote:

> On Monday 11 November 2013 17:19:08 John Ralls wrote:
> > On Nov 11, 2013, at 9:00 AM, Derek Atkins <warlord at MIT.EDU> wrote:
> > > John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us> writes:
> > >> On Nov 8, 2013, at 12:32 AM, Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be> wrote:
> > >>> See, if you install compat-guile18-devel, configure will detect
> > >>> guile
> > >>> 1.8 on your system, but the guile binary for 1.8 is called
> > >>> guile1.8. But gnucash only checks for "guile", which is the name
> > >>> of the guile 2.0 binary. So in this setup, you end up with CFLAGS
> > >>> and LDFLAGS for guile 1.8, but with the guile executable for
> > >>> guile 2.0.
> > >> 
> > >> We'd prefer Guile 2.0 if it's available, right? Should we invert
> > >> the
> > >> test so that we look
> > >> for Guile 2.0 first and fallback to Guile 1.8?
> > > 
> I already have the patch to prefer guile 2 over guile 1.8 in my local repository for quite some time. I have hesitated to push it to svn because there are still some issues with guile 2:
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=709589
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=707311

From the latter: "My guile knowledge is too limited to fully grasp this."

And your is way beyond mine. Perhaps you could ask Andy Wingo for help.

Regards,
John Ralls