On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 05:10:08PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > This is probably a bad idea, since that deliberately breaks things for > things that expect it to be there. If we *really* want to get rid of > this (and I'm not entirely convinced we should), why not just make an > alternative build subpackage and make the two conflict? One with Guile > support and one without? Then if something needs Guile integration for > Make, for example, they can install "make-guile" instead of "make". A better way to do that is I think what GCC does e.g. with isl, patch the source so that for the very rarely if ever used feature it doesn't link against the corresponding library, but instead dlopens it and calls it through dlsym pointers. That way, make would not have the guile dependency, and if somebody ever tries to use the guile stuff, it would dlopen the library, if it isn't there, it would print some sensible diagnostics like that dnf install guilewhatever is needed to make it work and fail. Jakub _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
