GPLed Java (Was: Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems)

2006-12-08 Thread Peter Busser
Hi!

 We don't use Sun's implementation of Java, because it's not
 ideologically pure ;-) Plus everyone knows that good programming
 languages have a specification that doesn't shift like quicksand...

Well, that is partially not true anymore. Sun already released two important
components of the Java implementation under the GPLv2. And more are to
follow during the first half of next year.

Groetjes,
Peter.


___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread Kon Lovett

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi Richard,

On Dec 7, 2006, at 9:35 AM, Richard Lewis wrote:


Hello CHICKEN users,

I'm new both to chicken scheme and, in fact, to scheme itself. I  
was attracted
to chicken as soon as I saw that it had a very simple module  
management

system.


Well, maybe not. New users w/ older chicken releases always run into  
the problems you are facing.




I have experienced a few problems with installing some of the eggs  
though. It
seems that two important eggs (i.e. ones with quite a few  
dependents) won't

install correctly: easyffi and base64.

aquila:/home/richard# chicken-setup easyffi
  /usr/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -s -O2 -d0 easyffi.scm -G
csc: invalid option `-G'
make: Failed to make easyffi.so: shell invocation failed with non- 
zero return

status
Error: shell invocation failed with non-zero return status
/usr/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -s -O2 -d0 easyffi.scm -G
64

and

aquila:/home/richard# chicken-setup base64
  /usr/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -s -O2 -d1
base64.scm -emit-exports base64.exports
csc: invalid option `-emit-exports'
Error: shell invocation failed with non-zero return status
/usr/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -s -O2 -d1
base64.scm -emit-exports ...
64

My system is Debian unstable with chicken 2.3

I hope its just something really simple!


Need at least version 2.5, which must be built from source for Linux.

You know the drill:

Get http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/ 
chicken-2.5.tar.gz. Extract. Follow the instructions in the README.


The current version is 2.509, but this must be acquired thru darcs or  
svn.


Sorry, Chicken is unstable in the sense that it is being extended and  
refined constantly. Many changes are not efficiently backwards  
compatible, especially when an egg requires a new feature.


Missing is the ability to associate Chicken  Egg versions. As the  
community grows this becomes more of a problem.




Also, I notice that it leaves the egg file and an associated  
directory in the

directory where I run chicken-setup. Is it alright to delete these
afterwards?


Yes.



(BTW, my jabber id predates not only my decision to try chicken  
scheme but

also my awareness of its existence!)

Cheers,
Richard
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Richard Lewis
Sonic Arts Research Archive
http://www.sara.uea.ac.uk/
JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkV4VU4ACgkQJJNoeGe+5O7nlQCfZV4wpyq+EqO+42tOOxxVjTwZ
+4sAn3hEsDPu+j7hWv59h/wv5OqYTf/H
=bm1P
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread Ivan Raikov

   I think even the most simple kind of Chicken/egg versioning would
go a long way.  For example, I can build easyffi and use it in Chicken
2.3 if I simply remove the -G option. So if chicken-setup supported
different build commands for different versions of Chicken, this would
make packaging Chicken code a whole lot easier. In my case, I want to
provide my software as Debian packages, and so I am stuck with
whatever version of Chicken is available in the current Debian stable
release.


Kon Lovett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Missing is the ability to associate Chicken  Egg versions. As the  
 community grows this becomes more of a problem.



___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread Mario Domenech Goulart
Hello Ivan,

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 13:04:57 -0500 Ivan Raikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I think even the most simple kind of Chicken/egg versioning would
 go a long way.  For example, I can build easyffi and use it in Chicken
 2.3 if I simply remove the -G option. So if chicken-setup supported
 different build commands for different versions of Chicken, this would
 make packaging Chicken code a whole lot easier. In my case, I want to
 provide my software as Debian packages, and so I am stuck with
 whatever version of Chicken is available in the current Debian stable
 release.

Would it be difficult to make Debian a little more up-to-date
regarding to Chicken?  2.3 is quite old.

Or maybe we should have an unofficial Chicken build for Debian and
its derivatives ([K,X]Ubuntu, Knoppix etc).  I don't know about dpkg
packaging and compatibility among distributions .deb packages, so I
have no idea if it's feasible, easy or even worth.

Best wishes,
Mario



___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread Richard Lewis
Thanks for your replies regarding this.

I've just managed to install easyffi by removing the -G option from 
easyffi.setup.

But it looks like I'll have to have a go at self-compilation. Being a Debian 
user I'm extremely unused to this sort of thing. Wish me luck ;-)

On Thursday 07 December 2006 18:15, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
 Hello Ivan,

 On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 13:04:57 -0500 Ivan Raikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I think even the most simple kind of Chicken/egg versioning would
  go a long way.  For example, I can build easyffi and use it in Chicken
  2.3 if I simply remove the -G option. So if chicken-setup supported
  different build commands for different versions of Chicken, this would
  make packaging Chicken code a whole lot easier. In my case, I want to
  provide my software as Debian packages, and so I am stuck with
  whatever version of Chicken is available in the current Debian stable
  release.

 Would it be difficult to make Debian a little more up-to-date
 regarding to Chicken?  2.3 is quite old.

 Or maybe we should have an unofficial Chicken build for Debian and
 its derivatives ([K,X]Ubuntu, Knoppix etc).  I don't know about dpkg
 packaging and compatibility among distributions .deb packages, so I
 have no idea if it's feasible, easy or even worth.

I would certainly use a Chicken Debian repository if someone were to make one.

Cheers,
Richard
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Richard Lewis
Sonic Arts Research Archive
http://www.sara.uea.ac.uk/
JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread Ivan Raikov

Well, I am not the maintainer for the Debian Chicken package, so I
don't know. But unless the more recent versions of Chicken depend on
libraries or library versions that are not present in Debian, it's
probably not that difficult. Actually, the real problem here would be
that the Debian release cycle takes about a year, and once a Debian
stable release comes out, the packages in it may not be upgraded,
except for security-related patches. So whatever version of Chicken
you pick, you are stuck with it for a year -- which is not at all
unreasonable from a release manager's point of view. Debian stable is
stable because it provides a consistent and well-tested environment,
even if it doesn't have all the bleeding edge software. That's why I
think that if developers can rely on some support for older Chicken
releases, this will contribute greatly to the usefulness of Chicken
for software in mainstream Linux distributions.

-Ivan

Mario Domenech Goulart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Hello Ivan,

 On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 13:04:57 -0500 Ivan Raikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I think even the most simple kind of Chicken/egg versioning would
 go a long way.  For example, I can build easyffi and use it in Chicken
 2.3 if I simply remove the -G option. So if chicken-setup supported
 different build commands for different versions of Chicken, this would
 make packaging Chicken code a whole lot easier. In my case, I want to
 provide my software as Debian packages, and so I am stuck with
 whatever version of Chicken is available in the current Debian stable
 release.

 Would it be difficult to make Debian a little more up-to-date
 regarding to Chicken?  2.3 is quite old.

 Or maybe we should have an unofficial Chicken build for Debian and
 its derivatives ([K,X]Ubuntu, Knoppix etc).  I don't know about dpkg
 packaging and compatibility among distributions .deb packages, so I
 have no idea if it's feasible, easy or even worth.

 Best wishes,
 Mario




___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread Zbigniew

It seems to me that if Debian provides a Chicken 2.3 package for
stability reasons, then Debian should also provide a 2.3 eggs package
and keep it up to date.  Using chicken-setup is inherently unstable
from the perspective of Debian stable, since the eggs are constantly
updated and haven't gone through the Debian release cycle.  If you
care enough to run Debian stable, you don't want to do this.  If you
want to use chicken-setup, you should use the latest stable version of
Chicken, which to me implies compiling or using Debian unstable (if
available).

I know that seems Draconian, but getting eggs to work on earlier
versions of Chicken is not always easy.  Dependencies may change,
features may not be available, etc.  I think it would be a massive
pain to maintain such a thing, not to mention the infrastructure isn't
there, although Felix can be surprising.

On 12/7/06, Ivan Raikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Well, I am not the maintainer for the Debian Chicken package, so I
don't know. But unless the more recent versions of Chicken depend on
libraries or library versions that are not present in Debian, it's
probably not that difficult. Actually, the real problem here would be
that the Debian release cycle takes about a year, and once a Debian
stable release comes out, the packages in it may not be upgraded,
except for security-related patches. So whatever version of Chicken
you pick, you are stuck with it for a year -- which is not at all
unreasonable from a release manager's point of view. Debian stable is
stable because it provides a consistent and well-tested environment,
even if it doesn't have all the bleeding edge software. That's why I
think that if developers can rely on some support for older Chicken
releases, this will contribute greatly to the usefulness of Chicken
for software in mainstream Linux distributions.



___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread Kon Lovett

On Dec 7, 2006, at 11:26 AM, Zbigniew wrote:


It seems to me that if Debian provides a Chicken 2.3 package for
stability reasons, then Debian should also provide a 2.3 eggs package
and keep it up to date.  Using chicken-setup is inherently unstable
from the perspective of Debian stable, since the eggs are constantly
updated and haven't gone through the Debian release cycle.  If you
care enough to run Debian stable, you don't want to do this.  If you
want to use chicken-setup, you should use the latest stable version of
Chicken, which to me implies compiling or using Debian unstable (if
available).

I know that seems Draconian, but getting eggs to work on earlier
versions of Chicken is not always easy.  Dependencies may change,
features may not be available, etc.  I think it would be a massive
pain to maintain such a thing, not to mention the infrastructure isn't
there, although Felix can be surprising.



Thank you. I was just going to mention that. What do Debian users do  
when they want some new Java package that depends on this years JVM 
+Libs, not last years?


However, being able to explicitly state Chicken-Egg  Egg-Egg version  
requirements would still be useful.




___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread Ivan Raikov

  You make a good point; actually, I would say that Debian needs to
have a package for each individual egg, so that the developer who
wishes to release Debian packages of their Chicken code can have
precise control over dependencies. But then this means that the egg
repository must match egg versions with Chicken versions, which is
essentially what I'd like to have. I am not suggesting that each egg
developer test their egg with all versions of Chicken ever
released. All I am proposing is a field in the egg setup file that
indicates which version(s) of Chicken was/were used to compile and
test that egg. This could be combined with a unit test framework. Such
a system would be optional, but it would still allow for dedicated
developers to port the eggs they are interested in to Debian stable
and package up their software.


 -Ivan

Zbigniew [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 It seems to me that if Debian provides a Chicken 2.3 package for
 stability reasons, then Debian should also provide a 2.3 eggs package
 and keep it up to date.  Using chicken-setup is inherently unstable
 from the perspective of Debian stable, since the eggs are constantly
 updated and haven't gone through the Debian release cycle.  If you
 care enough to run Debian stable, you don't want to do this.  If you
 want to use chicken-setup, you should use the latest stable version of
 Chicken, which to me implies compiling or using Debian unstable (if
 available).

 I know that seems Draconian, but getting eggs to work on earlier
 versions of Chicken is not always easy.  Dependencies may change,
 features may not be available, etc.  I think it would be a massive
 pain to maintain such a thing, not to mention the infrastructure isn't
 there, although Felix can be surprising.



___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread Ivan Raikov


We don't use Sun's implementation of Java, because it's not
ideologically pure ;-) Plus everyone knows that good programming
languages have a specification that doesn't shift like quicksand...


Kon Lovett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


 Thank you. I was just going to mention that. What do Debian users do
 when they want some new Java package that depends on this years JVM
 +Libs, not last years?


___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users


Re: [Chicken-users] New user; egg problems

2006-12-07 Thread John Cowan
Ivan Raikov scripsit:
 
 
 We don't use Sun's implementation of Java, because it's not
 ideologically pure ;-) Plus everyone knows that good programming
 languages have a specification that doesn't shift like quicksand...

Well, Algol (60 and 68) should meet your needs, then, as should PL/I.
Very stable, all of them.

-- 
Well, I have news for our current leaders   John Cowan
and the leaders of tomorrow: the Bill of[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rights is not a frivolous luxury, in force  http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
only during times of peace and prosperity.
We don't just push it to the side when the going gets tough.  --Molly Ivins


___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users