[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#177057: Redoing the clisp package, advice wanted

Hello Sam,

I'm redoing the clisp package from scratch to fix long standing issues like:

* unnecessary dependencies in clisp-dev:


* clisp: base/full in clisp-package


* clisp: please support --build ./configure option


You once mentioned in bug 177057 that:

> on a second thought, you might be right.
> in fact, you might want to offer several different packages, e.g., in
> addition to clisp-base,
> - clisp-db (base + bdb + postgresql)
> - clisp-gui (base + clx + gtk)
> - clisp-net (base + rawsock + ???)
> - clisp-math (base + libsvm + pari)
> you might also build clisp with dynamic modules and offer individual
> modules a la carte.

> I suggest that clisp-full depends on clisp-base and the latter is
> _always_ the default (as it is with the normal clisp installation).
> Note also that the file clisp/unix/INSTALL has a section "Additional
> Information for Maintainers of Binary Packages" with a "Module
> selection" subsection. I think it would be a good idea for debian to
> follow those suggestions.
> I am mostly concerned with "offering a uniform experience to all CLISP
> users regardless of platform or distribution".

Now I've been investigating the other packagings of clisp in Linux and
I've been unable to find one that fits this description.

The closest is the Gentoo package that can build a 'full' image with a
configurable base set. However this is pretty much Gentoo specific.

The mandriva package does only a normal 'configure ; make' type build:


Opensuse is down atm but from the google cache they also don't do
separate packages.

Could you explain how we can build 'clisp with dynamic modules and offer
individual modules a la carte.' and how users would interact with this?
I've tried grasping this from the manual but failed to do so I fear.

Could you give examples or a distribution that 'does the right thing'?

Best regards, Peter

Reply to: