On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 04:05:27PM -0400, Raymond Toy wrote:
> Oliver Kullmann wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 02:45:22PM -0400, Raymond Toy wrote:
>
> >Now the whole point of searching for another Lisp (other than CLisp) is
> >that it seems
> >not possible to reliably and automatically install CLisp on the (actually
> >rather
> >restricted) range of machines I'm using (from sources).
> >(So if I had a Lisp version which I could (reliably and automatically)
> >install,
> >I wouldn't need SBCL.)
>
> Of all the lisps I've used, clisp has been the easiest to install.
>
actually, after some problems finally ECL installs fine on all machines
--- if it only would be correct! sigh
> >
> >Perhaps the CLisp version used to compile SBCL doesn't matter so much?
>
> I do not know for sure, but I think the only Lisps that can reliably
> build SBCL are sbcl (of course!), cmucl, and openmcl/clozure.
>
thanks for the information.
Oliver