From: Bernhard Rinner
Subject: ACL Unix vs. ACL Linux
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <35FD2FE5.8B90C197@cs.utexas.edu>

We  have a rather big Lisp application (>100k LOC) running under ACL
4.3.1 on Unix platforms
(i.e. Sparc/SunOS).  We are planning to install a version of this
application on a PC running
Linux and ACL 4.3/5.0beta.
Are there any known limitations or differences on the Linux ACl-version?

(A critical part of our application might be the foreign function
calls.)

Thanks
Bernhard

-----------------------------------------------------------
-  Bernhard Rinner                                        -
-  The University of Texas at Austin, Computer Sciences   -
-  Taylor Hall 4.130C                                     -
-  Austin, Texas 78712-1188                               -
-  Tel.   (512) 471-9561                                  -
-  Fax    (512) 471-8885                                  -
-  EMail: ······@cs.utexas.edu                            -
-         ········@computer.org                           -
-----------------------------------------------------------

• Re: ACL Unix vs. ACL Linux Matt Kressel
• Re: ACL Unix vs. ACL Linux Stephan Pfab
  • Re: ACL Unix vs. ACL Linux Erik Naggum

From: Matt Kressel
Subject: Re: ACL Unix vs. ACL Linux
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <35FD4F66.BAC6FC1D@atdc.northgrum.com>

Bernhard Rinner wrote:
> 
> We  have a rather big Lisp application (>100k LOC) running under ACL
> 4.3.1 on Unix platforms
> (i.e. Sparc/SunOS).  We are planning to install a version of this
> application on a PC running
> Linux and ACL 4.3/5.0beta.
> Are there any known limitations or differences on the Linux ACl-version?
> 
> (A critical part of our application might be the foreign function
> calls.)


I haven't used the SunOS version of ACL, but I am currently
experimenting conversion from ACL 3.0.2 for Windows to Linux ACL 4.3.
From my experience I can tell you that it appears uncrippled.  I have used 
some foreign function calls to experiment with and found them much simpler
to code and insert into the running image than windows, but you probably
have this capability from SunOS version.  The only thing I had difficulty
with was the LISP memory imprint, but this is completely configurable (once
I read the docs in detail).

Does the SunOS ACL come with a GUI? 

Thanks,
Matt

-- 
Matthew O. Kressel | INTERNET: ···············@atdc.northgrum.com
+---------  Northrop Grumman Corporation, Bethpage, NY ---------+
+---------  TEL: (516) 346-9101 FAX: (516) 346-9740 ------------+

From: Stephan Pfab
Subject: Re: ACL Unix vs. ACL Linux
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <icd888pqyc.fsf@thales.sai.mathematik.uni-ulm.de>

Bernhard Rinner <······@cs.utexas.edu> writes:

> We  have a rather big Lisp application (>100k LOC) running under ACL
> 4.3.1 on Unix platforms
> (i.e. Sparc/SunOS).  We are planning to install a version of this
> application on a PC running
> Linux and ACL 4.3/5.0beta.
> Are there any known limitations or differences on the Linux ACl-version?
> 
> (A critical part of our application might be the foreign function
> calls.)

The load function requires absolute paths and always appends .lisp
in ACL linux. At least in 4.3.

ciao
Stephan

From: Erik Naggum
Subject: Re: ACL Unix vs. ACL Linux
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <3116499980374042@naggum.no>

* Stephan Pfab <····@thales.mathematik.uni-ulm.de>
| The load function requires absolute paths and always appends .lisp
| in ACL linux. At least in 4.3.

  that's odd.  before we got ACL 5.0.beta and could trust it, a mission
  critical application I built this spring and summer with ACL 4.3 for
  Linux compiled to .fasl files and everything worked just fine.  the Lisp
  files were not .lisp, but .cl.

#:Erik