[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Using CLISP instead of CCL to bootstrap SBCL
From: |
Pierre Neidhardt |
Subject: |
Re: Using CLISP instead of CCL to bootstrap SBCL |
Date: |
Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:39:04 +0200 |
Hi Mark,
First of all, thanks for your interest in Next! :)
If you look at the sbcl package, you'll see this comment which I
copy-pasted from SBCL "INSTALL" file:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
;; From INSTALL:
;; Supported build hosts are:
;; SBCL
;; CMUCL
;; CCL (formerly known as OpenMCL)
;; ABCL (recent versions only)
;; CLISP (only some versions: 2.44.1 is OK, 2.47 is not)
;; XCL
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
The point was 2-fold:
- CLISP seems unreliable.
- SBCL takes ages to compile with it :p (I know, this is mostly practical.)
We can ask the SBCL developers to let us know if they think CLISP can be
re-approved, but as far as I understand, it's mostly untested.
Another solution would be to bootstrap SBCL or CCL
differently. I haven't looked into the details, but there may be some
older version of CCL or SBCL that could be build from C or CLISP
reliably, then use those versions to build the latest CCL and SBCL.
I can look into maybe later next week (no promise, September is going to
be tight for me).
Cheers!
--
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature