I just took a casual look at the newlisp changes file and there's no prefix support so far, so I think it's fair game to have it checked. I've never submitted a patch for anything before.
- Welcome to newLISP Fan Club.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages1
#1
newLISP in the real world / Where do I submit a patch to the makefile?
May 27, 2009, 07:33:44 AMI just took a casual look at the newlisp changes file and there's no prefix support so far, so I think it's fair game to have it checked. I've never submitted a patch for anything before.
#2
newLISP in the real world / Modifying newlisp to be able to handle variable ${PREFIX}
April 05, 2009, 07:24:28 PMJust like to say I just recently discovered newlisp and am very interested in playing with it!
The first thing I want to do is literally play with newlisp itself, to make it more amenable with my package manager (and other package managers). For that to happen, I have to find a way to deal with the hardcodred "/usr" prefix in the package, and modify the ./configure script to globally change the /usr item there.
It seems easy for me to do this by simply grep'ing for all "/usr" instances and replacing it with some PREFIX variable. However,
1) there are a lot of instances of /usr, and I'm not confident I will not break anything
2) I am not experienced in playng with make files to make it such that when I run my ./configure, all instances of /usr get replaced with the proper prefix.
I think the main idea should work out that for all lisp files, I should instead get them to include a central configuration directive where
(setq newlisp-prefix "/usr")
is written or something like that. Then my ./configure script should run some sed script that replaces that with the given configure option.
Anyways, my basic idea is
1) hardcoded paths = bad
2) flexibility = good
I am looking at newlisp-10.0.2 source package freshly downloaded :D
Does anyone have any ideas?
Pages1