[STUMP] Should ECL support be removed from stumpwm ?

[z_axis]

It seems there is nobody to run stumpwm using ECL successfully. So i
suggest removing ECL relatives from stumpwm sources in order not to
mislead the users.


Regards!


_______________________________________________
Stumpwm-devel mailing list
Stumpw...@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel

[Wojciech Meyer]

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:04 AM, z_axis <z_a...@163.com> wrote:
> It seems there is nobody to run stumpwm using ECL successfully. So i suggest
> removing ECL relatives from stumpwm sources in order not to mislead the
> users.

If there are problems I would rather like to be them fixed rather than
removing the ECL port.
I'd do it myself if I had enough time. Currently ECL is one of the
most portable ports, so having
it would be very good.

-Wojciech

[Christian Walther]

Hi,

On 23 October 2012 12:46, Wojciech Meyer <wojciec...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:04 AM, z_axis <z_a...@163.com> wrote:
>> It seems there is nobody to run stumpwm using ECL successfully. So i suggest
>> removing ECL relatives from stumpwm sources in order not to mislead the
>> users.
>
> If there are problems I would rather like to be them fixed rather than
> removing the ECL port.
> I'd do it myself if I had enough time. Currently ECL is one of the
> most portable ports, so having
> it would be very good.

actually I tried using ECL with stumpwm, on the Raspberry Pi.
There seems to be at least one problem I came across. When installing
quicklisp ecl messes up (merge-pathnames) in the init file, which
renders quicklisp useless.
I fixed this manually but found another problem, one that seems to be
related to (merge-pathnames) as well, when called from within asdf.
Guess there's something broken in ECL related to the ARM platform.

So far I've been unable to investigate any further, due to time constrains.

Personally I agree with you Wojciech, it would be a pity if ECL
support is removed from stumpwm. But I'm really no Lisp expert and
thus doubt that I can be of great help in fixing the bugs, although
I'll be happy to do some testing and digging around if needed.

Regards,
Christian Walther

[Dirk Sondermann]

On 10/23/12 09:04, z_axis wrote:
> It seems there is nobody to run stumpwm using ECL successfully.
> So i suggest removing ECL relatives from stumpwm sources in order
> not to mislead the users.

About a week ago, as an answer to your message of October 11, I posted
a short description of how a working stumpwm image can be built using
ECL 12.7.1. I have been using this image for several days now without
any issues, so I dare to say there is no serious problem with stumpwm
and ECL.

--
Dirk

[z_axis]

I have seen your reply. But A ECL without thread is not a good choice.
Since i want to start swank server in stumpwm.

在 Wed, 24 Oct 2012 03:19:38 +0800，Dirk Sondermann
<ds-st...@dyximaq.de> 写道:

> On 10/23/12 09:04, z_axis wrote:
>> It seems there is nobody to run stumpwm using ECL successfully.
>> So i suggest removing ECL relatives from stumpwm sources in order
>> not to mislead the users.
>
> About a week ago, as an answer to your message of October 11, I posted
> a short description of how a working stumpwm image can be built using
> ECL 12.7.1. I have been using this image for several days now without
> any issues, so I dare to say there is no serious problem with stumpwm
> and ECL.
>

--

[z_axis]

ECL can build smallest stumpwm image which is good. Unfortunately i cannot
make it work as clisp-2.49(with thread) does.

在 Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:46:54 +0800，Wojciech Meyer
<wojciec...@googlemail.com> 写道:

> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:04 AM, z_axis <z_a...@163.com> wrote:
>> It seems there is nobody to run stumpwm using ECL successfully. So i
>> suggest
>> removing ECL relatives from stumpwm sources in order not to mislead the
>> users.
>
> If there are problems I would rather like to be them fixed rather than
> removing the ECL port.
> I'd do it myself if I had enough time. Currently ECL is one of the
> most portable ports, so having
> it would be very good.
>
> -Wojciech

--
使用 Opera 革命性的电子邮件客户程序: http://www.opera.com/mail/

[Dirk Sondermann]

On 10/24/12 03:55, z_axis wrote:
> Wed, 24 Oct 2012 03:19:38 +0800，Dirk Sondermann:

>> On 10/23/12 09:04, z_axis wrote:
>>> It seems there is nobody to run stumpwm using ECL successfully.
>>> So i suggest removing ECL relatives from stumpwm sources in order
>>> not to mislead the users.
>>
>> About a week ago, as an answer to your message of October 11, I posted
>> a short description of how a working stumpwm image can be built using
>> ECL 12.7.1. I have been using this image for several days now without
>> any issues, so I dare to say there is no serious problem with stumpwm
>> and ECL.
>

> I have seen your reply. But A ECL without thread is not a good choice.
> Since i want to start swank server in stumpwm.

You didn't mention that in your first post.

Not being able to use swank is a pity, but IMHO it doesn't justify to
remove the ECL support in the stumpwm sources.

--
Dirk

[Wojciech Meyer]

z_axis <z_a...@163.com> writes:

> I have seen your reply. But A ECL without thread is not a good
> choice. Since i want to start swank server in stumpwm.

That's not a good reason.

The only problem I have that StumpWM is not working on ARM.

--
Wojciech Meyer
http://danmey.org

[Ben Spencer]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Wojciech Meyer
<wojciec...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> The only problem I have that StumpWM is not working on ARM.

I'm using it on ARM (Toshiba AC100) with CCL trunk.

Ben