From: Robert G. <rpg...@si...> - 2010-09-20 11:50:13
|
On 9/20/10 Sep 20 -6:43 AM, Nikodemus Siivola wrote: > On 20 September 2010 12:07, Pascal J. Bourguignon > >>>> #!/usr/bin/env sbcl --script > >>> PS. Good catch on the "one arg only on the shebang-line" -- shame on me! > >> Or shame on the implementors of sbcl who may not have implemented the >> shebang-line argument parsing trick that other interpreters implement >> to deal with this problem... > > Doesn't help here. > > The point of /usr/bin/env is that it is a standard tool, which allows > the program on the shebang line to run from anywhere in $PATH, which > makes distributing scripts easier. > > However, on those unixes that don't support multiple arguments on the > shebang line, it is _env_ that receives the "sbcl --script" argument, > instead of two separate ones, and therefor fails trying to run the > program "sbcl --script". > > Now, if we installed a gimmicked binary with that name... :) But this > is pretty far offtopic. > > I'll be in touch with Zach regarding the how, and we'll if he deems it > sane or not. > > This thread is still a good place to say "no, please, don't bundle it > no matter how good an idea it seems!", "please bundle it no matter > what others say", or "whatever you do, please take X into account". > > Unsurprisingly, the last group of comments is the most useful one. :) In that connection, for our uses of SBCL, we like to have absolute command of our libraries, and would not delegate that to /any/ library manager (no matter how good!). So we'd certainly like it if it were possible to disable any such library manager without too much jumping through of hoops. I suppose that's not too surprising a "whatever you do," but worth statement. best, r |