[cl-debian] Bug#335489: slime: doesn't start on SBCL without cl-swank (it should depend on the latest)
Package: slime Version: 1:20051015-1 Severity: important Tags: patch -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello! The title says the problem. The severity is important, because you could want SLIME to connect to a remote swank and in this case you don't need a local cl-swank. At the same time, however, I think that depending on cl-swank by default is the best thing to do (cl-swank it's just 1.2MB), especially for newbies. Attached a patch versus the darcs repository [1]. Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca [1] http://cl-debian.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/darcsweb.cgi?r=slime;a=summary - -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.13 Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages slime depends on: ii emacsen-common 1.4.16 Common facilities for all emacsen Versions of packages slime recommends: ii cl-swank 1:20051015-1 Superior LISP Interaction Mode for ii emacs-snapshot-nox [info-br 1:20051020-1 The GNU Emacs editor (without X su pi emacs21 [info-browser] 21.4a-3 The GNU Emacs editor ii info [info-browser] 4.8-1 Standalone GNU Info documentation - -- no debconf information -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDXKJoVAp7Xm10JmkRAn2WAKCLgVbO5FNzB1wLfufP0SRco44hygCfUFxm 2wPJAhYZCP2W0zJlXRdHQk8= =GBuq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Monday 24 October 2005 10:59, Luca Capello wrote:
The severity is important, because you could want SLIME to connect to a remote swank and in this case you don't need a local cl-swank.
At the same time, however, I think that depending on cl-swank by default is the best thing to do (cl-swank it's just 1.2MB), especially for newbies.
In the end I think you're right, the added problem are not worth the reduction in complexity on the slime side. Groetjes, Peter -- signature -at- pvaneynd.mailworks.org http://www.livejournal.com/users/pvaneynd/ "God, root, what is difference?" Pitr | "God is more forgiving." Dave Aronson|
Why not have: * cl-slime, that depends on cl-slime-el and cl-swank * cl-slime-el, that contains the emacs lisp code and doesn't depend on cl-swank * cl-swank, that contains the common-lisp code and doesn't depend on cl-slime-el * sch-swank, that contains the scheme code... whatever. Do the Right Thing(tm). On 24/10/05, Luca Capello <luca@pca.it> wrote:
The severity is important, because you could want SLIME to connect to a remote swank and in this case you don't need a local cl-swank.
At the same time, however, I think that depending on cl-swank by default is the best thing to do (cl-swank it's just 1.2MB), especially for newbies.
Attached a patch versus the darcs repository [1].
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
Hello! On Mon 24 Oct 2005 16:02 +0200, Faré wrote:
Why not have: * cl-slime, that depends on cl-slime-el and cl-swank * cl-slime-el, that contains the emacs lisp code and doesn't depend on cl-swank
I'd prefer slime/slime-el here: slime is not a library (usually called cl-...), but a real "program", but... I see no point in creating a slime-el package as AFAIK SLIME works only on Emacs. OTOH, if SLIME supports multiple swanks (and *we* support multiple swanks), the Depends could be "cl-swank | sch-swank" ;-) Just my 0.02EUR... Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca
participants (3)
-
Faré -
Luca Capello -
Peter Van Eynde