Install on Mac OSX 10.4 yields no executable(?)

[Spinynorman]

When I download  the Mac OS X .dmg file and go through the install procedure, it  claims to have been successful, and a number of .lsp files are placed  under /usr/share/newlisp, but there doesn't seem to be any newLISP  executable anywhere.  Certainly not in Applications.  (There's no  NewLISP folder, either.)   Any advice on this?



I've tried using Searchlight and find, but maybe I don't know what to look for.  It would help to know the *exact* name of the executable for this installation. Maybe if there's a package manifest somewhere that spells out what files are supposed to be installed where (some of which may be overridable defaults), I could take a look at that.



If this is all covered in a FAQ somewhere, please point me there.



-jmc

[newdep]

HI,



some silly questions perhpas;



* If you install/extrackt the package with a 'verbose' option does it show any errors?

* or if you do a package list, what does it list?

* Do you have enough userrights?

* Do other dmg packages install correctly?



Regards, Norman

(the not spiny one :-)

[Lutz]

newLISP is primarily a commandline application, although it also comes with a graphical frontend written in Tcl/Tl, this does not appear in any applications folder.



After installing open a terminal from Applications->Utilties->Terminal and type: newlisp . Thist starts the interactive newLISP interpreter.



For the graphical frontend to newLISP type: newlisp-tk in the terminal window and wait for the GUI application to come up.



Lutz

[cormullion]

hi spinynorman - (Monty Python reference ? :-))



Don't be misled by the ease of installation! It's a regular binary, like other languages, just one of the very few that comes with a proper MacOS X installer (for which I have previously thanked Lutz - I don't like the compile-and-build business myself, not being a traditional C-programmer...

[Spinynorman]

Newdep:

1. No errors shown on install

2. Not sure what a "package list" is...

3. I *should* have enough user rights, I manage to do a lot of other things.

4. Other .dmg packages definitely install correctly



Lutz:

Um, well, yeah, the commandline approach seems to work pretty well.  I plead guilty to misdemeanor overlooking of the obvious.  Thanks.



It's still odd that there's (apparently) nothing added to Applications.  Not wrong, just not what I've come to expect.  Maybe a note for the slow children (e.g., me) would be a nice idiot-proofing enhancement...?



Thanks to both of you.