Gentoo Archives: gentoo-lisp

From: Stelian Ionescu <sionescu@×××××××××××.net>
To: gentoo-lisp@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-lisp] Last Rites: dev-lisp/gcl-cvs
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 16:27:21
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-lisp] Last Rites: dev-lisp/gcl-cvs by "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky"
On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 08:36:03AM -0700, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
>Do you know anyone on the Axiom, FriCAS, OpenAxiom or Sage lists? I'm >on all of them, and they're "Lisp-dependent". Briefly, there have >been some flamewars and two Axiom developers got upset enough to fork >off FriCAS and OpenAxiom. Where Sage fits into the picture is that >they picked up FriCAS. The last I looked (yesterday) FriCAS was >building with Clisp including all the X windows stuff. I'm not sure >but I think they can build with SBCL too, but prefer Clisp because >Cygwin carries it, giving them a working GUI CAS on a Windows box. > >I haven't seen much from OpenAxiom or Sage recently, but the original >Axiom is still carrying its own GCL source, which doesn't always work >(like on AMD64 for 2.6.8pre, for example). For that matter, Axiom and
I'm not surprised, given how broken a compiler GCL is even on i386
>its forks also depend on a more recent "noweb" than what's in Gentoo, >and carry their own source of that too. > >So I'd say Gentoo is probably safe with both SBCL and Clisp. Is CMUCL >as dead as I think it is
CMUCL is slowly, but actively, maintained
>? It's still masked on AMD64, right?
IIRC, CMUCL's AMD64 port was abandoned 3 years ago because the company that financed it switched to sbcl. I think it should work on a mixed 32/64 bit profile but I haven't got any such machine; perhaps you'd like to try to compile that and patch cmucl-19d_pre1-r1.ebuild accordingly ? -- Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-lisp] Last Rites: dev-lisp/gcl-cvs "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <hkBst@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-lisp] Last Rites: dev-lisp/gcl-cvs "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@×××××××.net>