Subject Author Date
Re: probably a small bug Bill Welliver <hww3[at]riverweb[dot]com> 02-11-2009
Yes, I think that's the simplest approach. You're right that you'd 
definitely want to use the precompile.pike included with the source when 
building in the source tree.

I'm not exactly sure what the rationale was for making the change, as I 
was under the impression that things were working correctly before.

I will take a look and make the necessary fix, hopefully this evening.


On Mon, 2 Nov 2009, Martin Stjernholm wrote:

> Put a different file in include/pike? It's only a couple of lines
> afterall, and it doesn't _have_ to be a copy of bin/precompile.pike,
> does it?
> Besides, in the case of an installed pike, isn't it mainly a compat
> measure for "pike -x precompile"? Not saying that it doesn't need to
> be fixed, but I reckon the best way is to change to that invocation
> method whereever possible.
> However for the source tree case, that doesn't work. We want to use
> the precompile tool from the pike version being compiled, also if the
> pike binary in the path is an older version.