[clfswm-devel] ./configure && make && make install?

[Michael Raitza]

Excerpts from Philippe Brochard's message of Sun Oct 21 23:26:35 +0200 2012:
> Hi,
> 
> I have deeply changed the load.lisp file so now it builds a clfswm
> executable image in the current directory. It can then install it in a
> different location. Also, if it can't find ASDF or CLX, it can ask to
> download them from there web site.
> So building the CLFSWM binary from scratch is as simple as this for each
> implementation. We just need a lisp on our system: 
> 
> clisp load.lisp
> sbcl --load load.lisp
> cmucl -load load.lisp
> ccl -l load.lisp
> ecl -load load.lisp
> 
> (At the time of writing, CMUCL doesn't link it. And ECL can build it but
> it doesn't works as expected).
> 
> So the question is: Is there somebody who use the ./configure && make
> && make install method? Or do you use your distro packages or quicklisp?
> 
> If nobody uses the ./configure script, I'd like to remove it from the
> source directory.
> 
> What do you think about this?
> And indeed test and feedback are very appreciated. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Philippe 
> 

I, for myself, see CLFSWM as a living system. I've modified my load.lisp
to start a SWANK listener on startup, so I can connect to my running
CLFSWM and modify it via EMACS while running it. As a consequence I
want CLFSWM to start from its sources and not to load any precompiled
image. So much for my usage model.

I think CLFSM can spare the configure/make trifold as this was developed
mostly for C-related projects in mind, but I am also not a fan of
over-automating things. Maybe we should provide a build.lisp that does
all the fanciness of finding and building the package, e.g. including
installing the binary and the sources (if somebody, like me, wished to)
somewhere meaningful.

But apart from that I would like to have a load.lisp such that I can
start CLFSWM directly from the sources.

For the building process... I would like to advocate XCVB. It's from the
same author as ASDF and is meant to be its successor. I shall be fairly
usable, but I haven't looked into it deeply. I think it's worth the try.

My 2cts,


Michael