On 6/8/06, Jack Unrue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Archive seems to has superseded tar.lisp and supports sbcl and lispworks (only on linux though AFAICT)
My personal preference would be to support both tarballs and zip files.
Cheers,
Sean.
On 6/7/06, I wrote:
>
> [2] For example, I think it's not so much the GNU tar and gz file formats
> that are problematic, but rather that AFAIK there are no portable
> Lisp implementations of those, hence asdf-install on Windows requires
> cygwin or similar compatibilty layer. One can debate the technical
> merits of various archive formats all day long, but the fact is that
> tar.gz is an established precedent as far as asdf-install is concerned.
I have subsequently become less ignorant about what's available:
http://common-lisp.net/project/zlib/
http://www.cs.rice.edu/~froydnj/lisp/tar.lisp
Archive seems to has superseded tar.lisp and supports sbcl and lispworks (only on linux though AFAICT)
My personal preference would be to support both tarballs and zip files.
Cheers,
Sean.
_______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
