On Fri, 6 May 2005, Christophe Rhodes wrote:
> When modifications start being made to the lisp code, especially, then
> yes I think that lisp-implementation-version could be tweaked. Maybe
> we should provide SB-EXT:VERSION< and VERSION>, as Helmut requested,
> before making such a change?
While on the topic, here's my list of thing to do (or at least think
about) within the next year or so, more-or-less related to the build
* customize-target-core.lisp or similar way to automatically build
and install cores with eg. contribs preloaded.
* supported ways to interrogate SBCL about it's build-host, used
customizations, etc. Possibly just SB-EXT:*INFORMATION* plist,
possibly something more elaborate.
* SB-EXT:SYS-ROOTDIR and (SETF SB-EXT:SYS-ROOTDIR) or similar for
twiddling the translations of the SYS host.
* SB-EXT:VERSION-FOO as requested by Helmut.
* a sane way to support multiple versions of SBCL installed. Lately
I'm thinking that instead of going by version numbers something
like install.sh --name "cvs-sbcl": let users name the version,
as in most cases people are probably uninterested in having
a history of umpteen versions and more interested in having
* a sane uninstallation system.
-- Nikodemus Schemer: "Buddha is small, clean, and serious."
Lispnik: "Buddha is big, has hairy armpits, and laughs."