[asdf-devel] Re: Tiny patch for cmucl print-herald

[Faré]

>     Fare> In this case, either dump-image should accept separate :executable and
>     Fare> :standalone arguments, and/or use :executable executable on CMUCL, and
>     Fare> :init-function restore-image
>     Fare> only when standalone. Backward compatibility is a bitch, whereby
>     Fare> :executable should default to T where practical, and :standalone
>     Fare> default to executable where executable-p. Ugh. I hate backward
>
> As it stands now, it seems that with cmucl only executable images can
> be created.  That seems not right.
>
> I'm willing to break backward compatibility for asdf and cmucl,
> in this one case. :-)  I doubt many people use executable images; I
> rarely do and when I do it's mostly for testing.
>
dump-image was initially stolen from cl-launch, which for
cross-implementation compatibility reasons and simplification in user
experience *really* prefers having to deal with only one file, i.e. an
executable image, than having to deal with many, e.g. an executable
and separate core.

Why can't cmucl use the correct gcc -m32, etc., flags, that will make
it work out of the box on ubuntu, etc.?

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
I don't program enough to be called a "programmer", and I don't non-program
enough to be called a "non-programmer". So I'm a non-non-programmer, which,
in intuitionistic logic, is weaker than a programmer.