Je Wed, 8 Jan 2014 22:58:06 -0500 (EST) Daniel Herring dherring@tentpost.com skribis:
Hi all,
For what little they're worth, here are my votes on the topic.
Q: Have Quicklisp distribute Slime? A: Sure! (Doesn't it already?)
Q: Have Slime rely on ASDF? A: Sure. The current Slime loader is generally reliable, but there is something to be said for pooling effort in a common solution, and ASDF has really improved in recent years.
Q: Have Slime rely on Quicklisp? A: No way! You've got this all backwards. Quicklisp adds downloading, dependency management, and such to ASDF. It also assumes a network connection and a certain level of trust in the repository.
Q: Have Slime rely on make? A: ?!?? GNU Make maybe, but it is essentially a non-starter on MSWin, Android, iOS, ....
Thinking about an ideal, non-Quicklisp-assisted install, could something like the following work?
- download and extract Slime (zip, tar.gz, or txz)
- open slime-install.lisp in Emacs
- follow some instructions that start an interactive session that
configures and installs (or upgrades) Slime
Dear List
I'd like to put in my two pennorth.
I am currently using the wheezy flavour of the Debian Linux distro and I should like to point out that slime is a standard Debian package. Both ASDF and Quicklisp are available as the Debian packages cl-asdf and cl-quicklisp respectively.
I also use sbcl and I notice that the ASDF bundled with sbcl is not as recent as that supplied by the Debian package cl-asdf. So, maybe some time should be given as to why that is so.
Yours aye -- Dr Sian Mountbatten http://www.poenikatu.co.uk/ Associate member of the FSF. No. 10888