Building maxima 5.9.0rc3 on Linux



>>>>> "Mike" == Mike Clarkson <michael@internetdiscovery.com> writes:

    Mike> At 08:35 AM 11/4/02 -0500, TenThumbs wrote:
    >> Well it turned out to be a disaster.
    >> 

    Mike> Regardless of the details, at the heart of this is an expression
    Mike> of frustration that we should all take to heart. 

    Mike> Instructions like "build x lisp only from CVS with version n of gcc
    Mike> but not version m before you build version z of maxima" etc. makes
    Mike> me think we are moving in a way that's getting a little out of hand.

Fortunately, this only seems to be a problem with gcl, and probably
only for a short time.  Maxima works nicely with clisp and cmucl.
What is supposed to happen when some Lisp is known not to work?  Don't
tell anyone?

Should the offending files not be used for those lisps?  Then someone
will complain that such and such lisp doesn't work but does work with
some other lisp.  :-)

Maxima is not in control of the underlying lisps.  If lisp X doesn't
build, that's not maxima's problem.  Maxima is supported by other
lisps.  

    Mike> I suggest something like
    Mike> 	maxima-announce
    Mike> 	maxima-users
    Mike> 	maxima-developers
    Mike> 	maxima-cvs
    Mike> 	maxima-ui
    Mike> as a breakup of this list. It can be broken up into the sourceforge
    Mike> mailing lists which are now gatewayed both directions into sourceforge
    Mike> newsgroups. Newsgroups I find much easier to read.

I don't find the volume on the current list to be overwhelming
(probably less than a message a day on average), so I wouldn't like
this split.

I also prefer newsgroups, but I can't reach nntp.sourceforge.net from
here, so I'd just stop reading.  But perhaps that might be a good
thing. :-)  Plus I thought it was just the discussion lists with the
web gui thing, and not the mailing lists that were gatewayed to nntp.

Ray