Bug#177057: Redoing the clisp package, advice wanted

[Sam Steingold]

OK, I fixed clisp-link.in and makemake.in (get them from CVS).
The relevant part of unix/INSTALL now reads:
==============================================
3. Binary package creation: we recommend distributing module "clisp" containing
   just the base linking set and individual modules packaged separately.
   We recommend keeping the base linking set (i18n, regexp, syscalls, readline)
   intact in order to ensure a uniform experience to all CLISP users regardless
   of platform or distribution.
   Each additional module should be packaged separately (step [C] below):
   A. Build clisp using "./configure --prefix=/usr --cbc CFLAGS='' build-dir"
   B. Create the base "clisp" package:
      $ cd build-dir
      $ make install DESTDIR=foo
      $ cd foo; tar cfz clisp.tar.gz *; cd ..; rm -rf foo
   C. Create a module package "clisp-modname" where "modname" is the module
      name, e.g., "rawsock" or "clx/new-clx" or ...:
      # install the module dependencies, e.g., postgresql-dev or x11-dev or ...
      $ cd build-dir
      $ make install-modules MODULES=modname DESTDIR=foo
      $ cd foo; tar cfz clisp-modname.tar.gz *; cd ..; rm -rf foo
   D. Dependencies: each package "clisp-modname" depends on "clisp" and, maybe,
      on an external library to which it interfaces, e.g., postgresql or pcre.
      It does _not_ depend on any development tool (gcc, libffcall, pcre-dev).
      E.g., modules "clisp-rawsock" and "clisp-wildcard" depend only on "clisp".
   See also <http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes/modules.html#base-modules>
   and "./configure --help-modules".
==============================================
note that the separate clisp-dev package does not make any sense.
clisp-link can be useful without any external compilers.