Hi Sam! I should apologize for being late: I planned to reply to your mail in the next days and providing patches. Unfortunately, I was then caught by other work, both for my real life and for Debian.
BTW, I read the pkg-common-lisp mailing list on a regular basis, so you do not need to cc: me. On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 21:50:39 +0200, Sam Steingold wrote: > now that clisp 2.47 has been released, you are 3 releases behind. :-) I know, but as you have probably heard Debian is (still) frozen, trying to release a new stable. Now, while this does not mean that new packages can be uploaded to experimental, I would prefer to avoid any work until lenny will be out. > A couple notes about the debian package: > > 1. README.Debian says "In order to use the "disassemble" function you > must install gdb". this is NOT true. gdb is only necessary to > disassemble functions written in C, e.g., car. functions written in > lisp and compiled to byte code can be disassembled without gdb. Something like the following patch? --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- diff --git a/debian/README.Debian b/debian/README.Debian index 999fd48..b4ea3e7 100644 --- a/debian/README.Debian +++ b/debian/README.Debian @@ -16,5 +16,6 @@ system calls to be made from clisp (e.g. resolve-host-ipaddr). disassemble ----------- - In order to use the "disassemble" function you must install gdb. - + In order to use the "disassemble" function written in C you must +install gdb. Any other function written in Common Lisp and compiled +to bytecode can be disassembled without gdb. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > 2. you are distributing clisp-link.1 - I don't think this is a good idea. Debian is quite strict WRT to executables, i.e. every executables should have a manpage. That is why I wrote it [1]. Thus, shipping it is in any case a win for Debian, but let me check your remarks. > A. clisp-link is rarely invoked by the user at the command line, > usually it is used from Makefiles. While I agree on this, I also know that people tend to not follow upstream recommendation and documentation. And in my experience, the first thing I do when I try a new program is to test the --help|-h options and `man program` ;-) > B. clisp-link is already fully documented in the impnotes. Debian ships the impnotes as part of the clisp-doc package, which means that in most of the case the impnotes will not be available together with the clisp-link executable. My idea was to provide the basic notions, i.e. the same thing we can discover if you read the source. Maybe should I add a note in the manpage to direct the user to the full documentation in the impnotes? > C. you are installing clisp-link.1 in /usr/share/man/man1 together > with clisp.1 but clisp-link does not go into /usr/bin together with > clisp, it lives in /usr/lib/clisp/ which is not normally in the $PATH. This is a good point: however, I cannot find any other manpage section more suitable for clisp-link.1. Obviously, if Debian decides to drop it, this point will be fixed as well. > 3. clisp-dev appears to depend on gcc 4.1 (at least when I try to > install clisp-dev on ubuntu, it wants to install gcc 4.1 in addition > to the standard gcc 4.2, see > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/274824). It seems that the version you tried is an old one, since the one in Debian does not depend on any gcc version (both clisp and clisp-dev packages), at least from version 1:2.43-1. > this is eminently wrong. even if clisp itself is compiled with gcc > 4.1, it can link with modules compiled with gcc 4.2, so there is no > reason for clisp-dev to pull gcc 4.1 (the same for bison, xutils, > groff &c &c). This could be a problem for Debian: if we build clisp with a specific gcc version, then we should depend on that version, since different gcc versions can be installed at the same time. > PS. Is there a way to report debian bugs other than via e-mail as > described in http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting ? No, and I am happy for this, since every web-based BTS I tried is IMHO a mess, while I can easily work from my Emacs whenever I need to deal with the Debian BTS :-D Please just send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with the Package pseudoheader [2]: this is the only required information for the bug to be assigned to the correct package (and thus the notification being sent to the maintainer). I will take care of adding the missing information (like the package version) and/or any other intervention is needed. Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca Footnotes: [1] I still remember that you asked me to convert clisp-link.1 to docbook/xml, but since it is a completely new language to me I need to sit down and learn it http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.clisp.devel/18633/focus=18636 [2] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting#pseudoheader
pgpL3vEvG8WRV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-common-lisp-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-common-lisp-devel
