| 1 |
On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 08:36:03AM -0700, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: |
| 2 |
>Do you know anyone on the Axiom, FriCAS, OpenAxiom or Sage lists? I'm |
| 3 |
>on all of them, and they're "Lisp-dependent". Briefly, there have |
| 4 |
>been some flamewars and two Axiom developers got upset enough to fork |
| 5 |
>off FriCAS and OpenAxiom. Where Sage fits into the picture is that |
| 6 |
>they picked up FriCAS. The last I looked (yesterday) FriCAS was |
| 7 |
>building with Clisp including all the X windows stuff. I'm not sure |
| 8 |
>but I think they can build with SBCL too, but prefer Clisp because |
| 9 |
>Cygwin carries it, giving them a working GUI CAS on a Windows box. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
>I haven't seen much from OpenAxiom or Sage recently, but the original |
| 12 |
>Axiom is still carrying its own GCL source, which doesn't always work |
| 13 |
>(like on AMD64 for 2.6.8pre, for example). For that matter, Axiom and |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I'm not surprised, given how broken a compiler GCL is even on i386 |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
>its forks also depend on a more recent "noweb" than what's in Gentoo, |
| 18 |
>and carry their own source of that too. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
>So I'd say Gentoo is probably safe with both SBCL and Clisp. Is CMUCL |
| 21 |
>as dead as I think it is |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
CMUCL is slowly, but actively, maintained |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
>? It's still masked on AMD64, right? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
IIRC, CMUCL's AMD64 port was abandoned 3 years ago because the company |
| 28 |
that financed it switched to sbcl. I think it should work on a mixed |
| 29 |
32/64 bit profile but I haven't got any such machine; perhaps you'd like |
| 30 |
to try to compile that and patch cmucl-19d_pre1-r1.ebuild accordingly ? |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix |
| 34 |
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. |
Archives