Please update lang/cmucl to 20c

[C. P. Ghost]

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Michel Talon <talon at lpthe.jussieu.fr> wrote:
>> any chance to see cmucl-20c (including cmucl-extras) in ports,
>> while at the same time keeping the current lang/cmucl as, say,
>> lang/cmucl19, because that version still supports non-SSE2
>> CPUs?
>
> The sse2 version is indeed much faster, and works on quite old computers
> nowadays
>
> so i am not sure that the generic version is still useful.

Well, it is: I have a couple of machines that don't have SSE2
instruction set (e.g. VIA C3 and some older Pentiums), that
are really dependent on at least one working CL implementation
that doesn't require SSE2. I really have nothing against a version
with SSE2 support -- I love Clozure CL for example despite it
being SSE2-only --, but I can't replace all pre-SSE2 boxes right
now, just to accommodate the new CMUCL.

>> And while I'm asking for it, could the cmucl port include
>> the sources (perhaps from the source release tar ball or
>> as part of the building-from-source process?) in such a
>> way that it is available from within lisp itself?
>
>
> In fact the exact position of the source code from which the binary has been
> compiled
>
> is annotated in the binary, so the only solution to make debugging, etc.
> work is to
>
> avoid completely moving the source code after compilation. So practically
> you have to compile
>
> cmucl (or sbcl) in your home and live it here. The ports system is useless
> here.

Yes, that's the problem.

Maybe these ports could be compiled *outside* the ports tree? I.E. move
the sources to their final destination and then only bootstrap lisp and
compile a core image from there? That's not the Canonical Way of ports,
but as a workaround, it could be enabled e.g. as an OPTION. Just a
humble suggestion though... it's up to the port maintainers to decide and
figure out a way to do it.

> Michel Talon
> talon at lpthe.jussieu.fr

Regards,
-cpghost.

-- 
Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/