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

[Faré]

On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Fare" == Far  <Far> writes:
>
>     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.
>     >>
>     Fare> dump-image was initially stolen from cl-launch, which for
>     Fare> cross-implementation compatibility reasons and simplification in user
>     Fare> experience *really* prefers having to deal with only one file, i.e. an
>     Fare> executable image, than having to deal with many, e.g. an executable
>     Fare> and separate core.
>
>     Fare> Why can't cmucl use the correct gcc -m32, etc., flags, that will make
>     Fare> it work out of the box on ubuntu, etc.?
>
> I'll have to check, but I'm pretty sure it uses gcc -m32.  Of course,
> this only works if you have the 32-bit development environment
> installed.  I suspect most people don't, including you.  It works for
> me, but I have the 32-bit dev environment installed so I can build
> cmucl.
>
Oh, and indeed, after I
apt-get install libc6-dev-i386
it works.

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent — Eleanor Roosevelt
But you're only fooling yourself if you can't recognize your superiors — #f