clbuild considered not harmfull at all

[pvaneynd]

Actually clbuild seems to do the right thing almost all the time.

I've been trying it as a workaround to suggest to users after I remove most of the Common Lisp libraries from Debian. Honestly it is pretty good: you download it, you ask it to install libraries an it will download them from their git/cvs/darcs/whatever repositories. You can ask it to upgrade the libraries or to compile and start slime with the libraries 'known' to asdf.

All in all quite good, even if there is a conflict between the slime in clbuild and the slime from the Debian package.

I think I can suggest this to Debian users without reservations...

Now: why didn't I see more of this on planet.lisp ?

Comments

clbuild

[https://me.yahoo.com/a/JFFpswVvqPZDNXgYBhBiFpqe#eaadc (from livejournal.com)]

Yes, clbuild is definitely good if you want to work at the head all the time.

Although when I started using it I discovered that it's hard to control revisioning so that I could use version 0.97 of local-time for example. This is where package management (and Debian) comes in I suppose.

mudballs looks good, did you take a look at it?

Steve

Re: clbuild

[(Anonymous)]

Mudballs has been abandoned by its creator. If you want to use it, be prepared to maintain it yourself.

Re: clbuild

[https://me.yahoo.com/a/JFFpswVvqPZDNXgYBhBiFpqe#eaadc (from livejournal.com)]

Is that confirmed by the author? Or does it just seem that way? I can find no mention of the 'abandonment' on Sean Ross' blog ...

Steve

Flag day

[lhealy.livejournal.com]

Aside from the other comment noting that there's no option to use a "stable" version of a package (you're always going to be using the latest version), switching to clbuild entails a kind of "flag day" switch from clc. That is, I've was unsuccessful mixing Debian CL packages with clbuild, so in order to use it, it appeared that I needed to remove all usage of Debian packages. That's kind of hard to do because I use a lot of packages and am trying to real work at the same time. Of course if the Debian CL packages go away, that will have to happen.

its the only way to go

[(Anonymous)]

clbuild is really the only way to go.

A lot of these libraries are being updated with critical features or bug-fixes much more rapidly than package managers can keep up with.

clbuild makes it easy to stay abreast of current developments and manages sources quite well.

It could probably be improved to do something like virtualenv for python and allow developers to specify asdf "environments" created with specific versions of libraries.

However, we're living in the age of "good enough" and clbuild fits the bill for me. :)

I can't suggest the use of clbuild

[(Anonymous)]

Unfortunately, cl-build is diametrically opposed to what the user of a packaged system needs; it is the Lisp equivalent of going back to recompiling every binary on one's system from source. There's a reason that package management was invented: the loss of up-to-the-minute bugfixes and feature additions was more than outweighed by the gain in reliability and reproducibility.

I love common-lisp-controller; it's the Right Thing for Debian and for Fedora--and probably for any Unix Lisp installation.

So what needs to done to keep clc?