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

[Desmond O. Chang] Re: dh_lisp usage

[ Resend it to the list. ]

Hi Diogo & Christoph,

diogofsr at gmail.com (Diogo F. S. Ramos) writes:

> Hello!
> Christoph Egger <christoph at debian.org> writes:
>> diogofsr at gmail.com (Diogo F. S. Ramos) writes:
>>> I'm trying to use dh_lisp as stated at the manual [1] but without
>>> success.
>>   As far as I remember dh_lisp went away together with
>> common-lisp-controller and is not needed any more. I'm Cc-ing Desmond
>> because IIRC he was the one doing this reorganization. In that case
>> we'll really need to adopt the manual.
> After some talking in the IRC, apparently the changelog indeed point to
> some changes to dh_lisp [1], particularly at version 0.7.0:
> dh-lisp (0.7.0) unstable; urgency=low
>   * do not link asd files
>   * do not generate maintainer scripts for c-l-c
>   * do not generate c-l-c dependency for library packages
>   * do not install implementation control script
>   * do not create maintainer scripts for c-l-c
>   * do not generate c-l-c dependency for implementation packages
>   * debian/control
>     + change Standards-Version to 3.9.1
>     + modify package description
> I wonder what are the directives now to pack Lisp applications.
> [1]  http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/d/dh-lisp/current/changelog

Please read /usr/share/doc/dh-lisp/README.Debian .

Since most active CL implementations have provided ASDF2 as a built-in
module, it doesn't need to depend on C-L-C for all CL packages any

That's why I released dh-lisp 0.7.0 .  For backward compatibility, I
can't remove dh-lisp now.  I have to wait until all CL packages drop
the dependency of C-L-C.  We should remove C-L-C before we remove

In conclusion, if you're creating a new CL package, no need to
Build-Depend on dh-lisp.

The CLID on alioth is really outdated.  Do not learn it at this
moment.  We should rewrite it.


Reply to: