> If the build of your favorite lisp still fails, you'll have to dive into the > source to see what's wrong. It might be something relatively easy to fix. > Some familiarity with C is probably required, though. :-) Except for clisp, which is based on a C bootstrap, the others are written in lisp and C code is reduced to very little. On the other hand the lisp compiler produces machine code, so porting to another architecture requires important knowledge of the machine. In particular for clisp i see this in the NetBSD pkgsrc makefile: # Sparc64 has assembler code problems, see # http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=952681&group_id=1355&atid=101355 NOT_FOR_PLATFORM= *-*-sparc64 NOT_FOR_PLATFORM+= *-*-arm so i would not expect a quick solution. But no such restriction for sbcl.
As for Debian port of sbcl to 64 bits amd64 i know i have seen reports of incorrect maxima programs in the maxima mailing list, so i suspect this port to be buggy. For sparc64 i don't know. You can find various cmucl snapshots here: http://common-lisp.net/project/cmucl/downloads/snapshots/2012/01/ i think one of the authors has a sparc machine, and also runs maxima, so i would be confident that cmucl works OK on the sparc, but it is here apparently under solaris. -- Michel Talon ta...@lpthe.jussieu.fr _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
