From drewc at tech.coop Sat Jan 23 20:13:07 2010 From: drewc at tech.coop (Drew Crampsie) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:13:07 -0800 Subject: [clbuild-devel] New repo for lisp-on-lines Message-ID: Hey Gents, I've moved LoL to git and the new repo is at http://common-lisp.net/project/lisp-on-lines/lisp-on-lines.git Can we make the change to clbuild? Cheers, drewc From alex at blackkettle.org Tue Jan 26 10:33:02 2010 From: alex at blackkettle.org (Alex Young) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:33:02 +0000 Subject: [clbuild-devel] Changes for clozure on Linux Message-ID: <4B5EC4DE.9010706@blackkettle.org> To get things working on 32-bit Linux with ccl without an instance pre-installed, I had to make the attached changes. After doing a: $ ./clbuild update ccl I also had to: $ mkdir scratch $ cp -a source/ccl scratch/ccl before: $ CCL=`pwd`/scratch/ccl/lx86cl ./clbuild compile-implementation ccl would work without complaining about symlinking files to themselves. Does that look right, or did I miss something obvious? I'm a bit new to this CL lark, so I might have had an attack of the stupids. One thing stands out - the svn source line for ccl involves the architecture, so obviously that part of my changes is non-optimal for anyone else. Would a patch to help with that be appreciated? Similarly for matching the uname -m call; I've used i686, but I'm sure there are still people with i386 kernels around. -- Alex -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clbuild.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 573 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pvaneynd at mailworks.org Wed Jan 27 05:55:53 2010 From: pvaneynd at mailworks.org (Peter Van Eynde) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:55:53 +0100 Subject: [clbuild-devel] multi-user clbuild patches [resend as ML member] Message-ID: <4B5FD569.4030207@mailworks.org> Hello all, I've been working on incorporating clbuild into clc. The plan is not to ship clbuild with Debian, but to have an installer/wrapper program. At the moment this works sort-of ok (I still have to do some more testing and integration), but I've already noticed that I'll need to have some patches done to clbuild itself. The main reason is that clbuild assumes that it can write to the directory that it is in, which is perfectly ok if I do stuff like "clbuild install foo", because they will be run as a special cl-builer user. However I had hoped to enable normal users to do "clbuild slime" or "clbuild lisp" or even "clbuild preloaded" and friends. This fails because for example "clbuild slime" wants to write to $BASE/.swank-loader.lisp. I've changed this to ~/.swank-loader.lisp without any bad effects with the attached diff. Would you be interested in incorporating this and possible future diffs into clbuild? Groetjes, Peter -- signature -at- pvaneynd.mailworks.org http://www.livejournal.com/users/pvaneynd/ "God, root, what is difference?" Pitr | "God is more forgiving." Dave Aronson| -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clbuild.diff Type: text/x-patch Size: 481 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 900 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: