followup to comment on http://mentors.debian.net/package/ccl
Peter Van Eynde
pvaneynd at debian.org
Tue Oct 9 18:25:50 UTC 2012
On 09 Oct 2012, at 07:06, Faheem Mitha <faheem at faheem.info> wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Christoph Egger wrote:
>> I'm sorry to not responding to your requests for comment. It's
>> currently rather hard for me to free some more time for Debian so I'm
>> not really active currently. though I'll try to free an evening this
>> week looking at ccl -- I'm really looking forward to having a ccl
I fear that I'm also having quite a bit of RL work to handle and my Debian time is rather limited.
The situation is not helped by CCL being so 'different'. Just getting started by downloading the source is a jarring experience.
I mean a different svn branch per architecture? How can we handle that? Debian expects that we give a 'pristine' tar.gz of upstream, without binaries... Then we get to the 'rebuild gcc' as part of the build part :(.
Still I think you did a lot of good work and having CCL would indeed be cool... I just wish I could be more effective in this :(.
signature -at- pvaneynd.mailworks.org
God, root, what is difference?-Pitr|God is more forgiving.-Dave Aronson|
More information about the pkg-common-lisp-devel