Greetings, and thanks so much for clarifying! Can you please give me a sample out of source tree build command line with which I can test and propose a resolution?
Waldek Hebisch <de...@fricas.org> writes: > However, I must ask: what is wrong with 'compiler::link'? Once > we re-add support for out of source build Makefile using > 'compiler::link' will be of comparable size as version not > using it and IMO 'compiler::link' will give more robust Makefile > (basically cruft in 'compiler::link' variant is constant, while > avoiding it leads to variable cruft which may break in strange > setups). I wrote compiler::link many years ago as a stopgap compromise to get a standalone separate GCL to support the standard applications. Prior to this it was conventional to take snapshots of the GCL source code and embed it into the source of the applications, with the obvious maintenance difficulties accompanying. I do not intend to withdraw compiler::link anytime soon, but it alone requires shipping a large number of GCL source files and compiled libraries alongside the GCL binary. The alternate '(load "foo.o")(save-system "bar")' lisp paradigm is clearly dominant, and arguably a distinctive feature of the lisp 'world'. Supporting two different linkers is fragile and an extra maintenance headache I would like to avoid. FRICAS is the last application still using it. Take care, -- Camm Maguire c...@maguirefamily.org ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FriCAS - computer algebra system" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fricas-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/fricas-devel/87h655j2bk.fsf%40maguirefamily.org.
