From: <ny...@sc...> - 2004-07-03 00:32:39
|
Hello all. At http://www.dridus.com/~nyef/sbcl-0.8.9-win32-changes.tgz is a tarball containing diffs and new files between released 0.8.9 and my current working directory for win32. I haven't touched it in about two weeks, so I figured it was time to let someone else take a shot at it if they wanted. Thus far, all compilation has been done using a mingw cross- compiler (gcc 3.3.1) on a Linux box and sbcl 0.8.5. You may need to modify the Config file for the runtime to suit the compiler you end up using. Some of the (new) functions in wrap.c may be set up to print far more information than is necessary. write(), for example, could probably be unwrapped without too much trouble. For some reason, the Win32 console likes to return a bad file descriptor error when writing to stdout or stderr. No doubt there is a good reason for this. Using cygwin rxvt or cygwin emacs around a bash shell will prevent this from happening. There is still some sort of data corruption going on. During the final purify for the save-lisp-and-die in make-target-2 the control structures for malloc()/free() get corrupted. If you call (sb!impl::messagebox 0 "Foo" "Bar" 0) from the repl, you get a crash somewhere in user32; but if you call (dotimes (i 2) (sb!impl::messagebox 0 "Foo" "Bar" 0)), it works. Oh yeah, and the wrapper for open() has a nasty hack in it. If it is passed an absolute path, it strips off the first #\/, so as to turn it into a relative path (mostly so that the src directory didn't have to be C:\src for warm init). --Alastair Bridgewater |
From: Christophe R. <cs...@ca...> - 2004-07-07 09:51:03
|
ny...@sc... writes: > At http://www.dridus.com/~nyef/sbcl-0.8.9-win32-changes.tgz > is a tarball containing diffs and new files between released > 0.8.9 and my current working directory for win32. I haven't > touched it in about two weeks, so I figured it was time to > let someone else take a shot at it if they wanted. Out of interest, does anyone on this list have an interest in sbcl on windows? I worry slightly that all the members here are already using Unixoid platforms moderately exclusively. If no-one here is biting, it may be worth posting this to a more general audience... Cheers, Christophe -- http://www-jcsu.jesus.cam.ac.uk/~csr21/ +44 1223 510 299/+44 7729 383 757 (set-pprint-dispatch 'number (lambda (s o) (declare (special b)) (format s b))) (defvar b "~&Just another Lisp hacker~%") (pprint #36rJesusCollegeCambridge) |
From: Edi W. <ed...@ag...> - 2004-07-07 10:52:29
|
On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 10:42:39 +0100, Christophe Rhodes <cs...@ca...> wrote: > Out of interest, does anyone on this list have an interest in sbcl > on windows? Me, definitely. (You might be asking yourself what the hell I'm doing on sbcl-devel but I'm just curious... :) I'm using FreeBSD and Linux whenever possible but I have to pay my rent so I also have to use Windows from time to time. Having a working SBCL or CMUCL would be really great! > I worry slightly that all the members here are already using Unixoid > platforms moderately exclusively. If no-one here is biting, it may > be worth posting this to a more general audience... How is this related to the CMUCL port? <http://home.comcast.net/~bc19191/blog/040706.html> Would it be worthwhile to join forces? Cheers, Edi. |
From: Raymond T. <ray...@er...> - 2004-07-07 16:47:57
|
>>>>> "Edi" == Edi Weitz <ed...@ag...> writes: Edi> How is this related to the CMUCL port? Edi> <http://home.comcast.net/~bc19191/blog/040706.html> AFAIK, they're completely independent works. There was also a message to cmucl-imp about someone paying for a Windows port. I don't know what's happened with that, but these all seem to be independent of each other. Ray |