1 |
Hi gang. |
2 |
|
3 |
I'm going to celebrate my newfound gentoo developer status by not doing |
4 |
anything on gentoo at all this weekend. I'm heading out of the country for |
5 |
a much-earned relaxation weekend in the Scottish highlands. |
6 |
|
7 |
When I get back, I'm going to suggest we make a dev-lisp category. I have |
8 |
two working ebuilds for that category currently: ecls-0.2 and gcl-2.4.0 |
9 |
|
10 |
I'm working on sbcl and cmucl, but here is a small problem: Neither sbcl |
11 |
nor cmucl can be bootstrapped from C (or any lisp implementation we can |
12 |
compile using only the C compiler). sbcl must be bootstrapped from itself |
13 |
of cmucl. cmucl must be bootstrapped from itself. |
14 |
|
15 |
What this means is that to install cmucl og sbcl, we have to first get an |
16 |
x86 binary for the particular compiler, then run that as the bootstrapping |
17 |
compiler. |
18 |
|
19 |
This primarily means we will fetch and run a binary, which I don't think |
20 |
is being done anywhere (except if you consider the gentoo build iso |
21 |
itself as a bootstrap) until now, and that this binary will only run on |
22 |
x86. |
23 |
|
24 |
I don't necessarily see a problem with this, but it's a bit different from |
25 |
all the other packages we have. |
26 |
|
27 |
Comments, suggestions ? (I'll read them when I get back on sunday |
28 |
evening). |
29 |
|
30 |
(In the distant future, sbcl might be able to bootstrap on ecls, and cmucl |
31 |
might be able to bootstrap on sbcl, so we could theoretically built it all |
32 |
completely from sources for the die-hard purists, but don't hold your |
33 |
breath.) |
34 |
|
35 |
Regards, |
36 |
|
37 |
Karl T |