Re: [open-axiom-devel] binutils subtree removed

2010-11-05 Thread Camm Maguire
Greetings, and thanks so much for your helpful feedback! "Andrey G. Grozin" writes: > On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Camm Maguire wrote: >> But this leaves the question of the gmp4 directory. Tim once told me >> he would have to include it if I removed it, for the convenience >> reasons you mention above.

Re: [open-axiom-devel] binutils subtree removed

2010-11-04 Thread Andrey G. Grozin
On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Camm Maguire wrote: > But this leaves the question of the gmp4 directory. Tim once told me > he would have to include it if I removed it, for the convenience > reasons you mention above. I'm not really sure what I think here. A > lisp system must implement mp, so it is not il

Re: [open-axiom-devel] binutils subtree removed

2010-11-04 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
Camm Maguire writes: | Greetings! | | Gabriel Dos Reis writes: | | > One question: does compiler::*default-system-p* still control whether | > the built GCL uses a copy of its C header file from its image or from | > its system directory? It is extremely convenient to be able to use GCL, | >

[open-axiom-devel] binutils subtree removed

2010-11-04 Thread Camm Maguire
Greetings! Gabriel Dos Reis writes: > One question: does compiler::*default-system-p* still control whether > the built GCL uses a copy of its C header file from its image or from > its system directory? It is extremely convenient to be able to use GCL, > `built on the fly as part of building A