Re: Lowercase naming requirement for systems?

2019-02-17 Thread Florian Margaine
Hi,

On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:54 PM Robert Dodier 
wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 6:25 AM Robert P. Goldman 
> wrote:
>
> > Quick response for now: yes, lowercase naming is a requirement.
>
> Hi Robert, thanks for your reply. Got it, no problem. I will adjust my
> stuff accordingly.
>
> It would really help a lot if the policy for the name of the system
> and the corresponding .asd filename were spelled out in the ASDF
> manual. As it stands, the manual doesn't say anything about
> requirements for system-designator; there are incidental comments
> suggesting using lowercase but not a specification or requirement. If
> names are indeed restricted to lowercase letters, digits, and hyphens,
> it would be great to say so.
>

At least this exists, although I'm not sure how easy to find it is:
https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/blob/master/doc/best_practices.md

Cheers,
-- 
Florian Margaine


Re: Can not upgrade to ASDF 3.3.0

2017-11-06 Thread Florian Margaine
Hi,


Le 7 nov. 2017 12:24 AM, "Vince"  a écrit :


Now the reason I want to do this is that it looks like my last solution
to build an executable with ECL (I'd like to build a smaller executable
than with SBCL). I was hit by the fact that ASDF did not ship
make-build, which is the build procedure documented by ECL.
Other options like program-op are not really documented either.
I explained and keep track of the issue here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46520876/building-
an-executable-with-ecl-missing-dependency-or-can-not-find-make-build-i
:)


I did something similar in a side project a few weeks ago, see the Makefile
and the build.lisp file in there: https://gitlab.com/ralt/niboot


Regards,

Vincent



Cheers,
Florian


Re: monolithic-lib-op

2015-10-06 Thread Florian Margaine
Hi,

After speaking a bit with jackdaniel on irc, it seems that the issue is
correctly writing the .a files? If so, since it's a simple ar archive, this
could be done in Lisp. I wrote an ar writer in less than 100 lines with
some hard coded values:
https://github.com/ralt/deb-packager/blob/master/src/ar.lisp

The format is basically: a global header followed by the entries. (Entries
format is relatively straightforward, I invite you to look at the code.)

I think it would be pretty straightforward to implement the reader in Lisp
to manually add .o files to the end of the .a archive. (Basically, add new
entries at the end of the archive.)

Maybe I haven't fully understood the issue though. In that case, you can
fully ignore me :-)

Regards,
Florian

Le 6 oct. 2015 07:50, "Daniel Kochmański"  a écrit :
>
>
> Faré writes:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Daniel Kochmański 
wrote:
> >>
> >> Faré writes:
> >>
> >>> Difficulties making monolithic-lib-op portable suggest that it (and
> >>> maybe also lib-op) should output an object file as if by ld -r rather
> >>> than a static library. Indeed, there is no *portable* way to combine
> >>> several .a files into a single one on a BSD system (including MacOS
> >>> X). Or should that be the case only on said systems?
> >>
> >> We have currently bug regarding combining static libraries[1], but
doesn't
> >> BSD nor OSX support libtool? If yes, then we can just extract all
> >> objects from static archive and combine them again.
> >>
> >> [1] https://gitlab.com/embeddable-common-lisp/ecl/issues/177
> >>
> >> In one of the comments @Whimse provides a working solution using
> >> libtool.
> >>
> > Do you require libtool to be installed on BSD (including OSX)?
> > It certainly doesn't come standard, not even on Linux.
>
> It is at least dependency at ECL compilation time (bdwgc requires
> it). It isn't that unreasonable to require it for C backend.
> > Also, I could never get libtool to work correctly, even on Linux,
> > despite having alleged cut-and-paste recipes and a man page.
>
> @Whimse claims it works just OK for him. I'll have to adjust it to play
> nice with cross-compilation framework I'm working on now.
> >
> > I was thinking about MRI scripts, but they are also a GNUism not
> > supported on BSD.
> >
> > Why do we need a .a rather than a .o, anyway?
> > For the proposed use case, a .o seems more reasonable.
>
> That's what we do - we combine .o files. But Sometimes we want to
> combine with already built static libraries. That's when such approach
> would be necessary. Mentioned bug affects only such situations. If you
> just do monolithic build from lisp lisp sources then there's not a
> problem.
> >
> > —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection•
http://fare.tunes.org
> > Director is a misnomer. You're a hoper. You put all these people
together and
> > you hope it all works out.  — Frank Oz, director of "Dirty Rotten
Scoundrels"
>
> --
> Daniel Kochmański | Poznań, Poland
> ;; aka jackdaniel
>
> "Be the change that you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi
>


program-op compression

2015-09-28 Thread Florian Margaine
Hi list,

I want to use asdf's program-op to dump an image, using this command:

sbcl --eval '(asdf:operate :build-op :my-system)'

This works perfectly. An image is correctly dumped, and works fine.

However, the image is 70MB. Is it possible to use
sb-ext:save-lisp-and-die's :compression option? In the source, I've
seen :extra-build-args, but it seems to be a make-build option only.
I'm not very familiar with asdf's source though, so I'm surely missing
something.

Cheers,
-- 
Florian Margaine