[Axiom-developer] Re: OpenAxiom-1.2.1 released

[Aleksej Saushev]

root <address@hidden> writes:

>> > Given that the goals of OpenAxiom are directly opposed to the stated
>> > project goals of Axiom, how do you see that this difference should be
>> > resolved?
>> 
>> I repeat, that from user point of view the difference between projects
>> is that one builds and another does not. While I can build FriCAS and
>> OpenAxiom, I cannot boast it with Axiom. And the impression from my side
>> is that you handle build problems ad hoc (cf. Slackware build problems):
>> each linux-based system gets its own configuration file with quite
>> uncommon content.
>
> So you didn't see the grep/egrep bug that caused FriCAS not to build?
>
>> What should be done, if I happen to need Axiom on HP-UX, is unknown.
>
> There is no claim that Axiom runs on HP-UX. It might. It might not.
>
> ...[snip]...
>
>> And from my user point of view, Axiom should adopt either FriCAS' or
>> OpenAxiom's build system, whatever is closer, or develop similar one,
>
> Please post a diff-Naur patch.

I'm not going to do any work, that is rejected before planning stage.
It is a mere waste of time, I'm not going to live forever or wait forever,
even 5 years is too much.

> You clearly believe that Axiom should adopt the "standard autoconf"
> method of building. 
>
> I clearly believe that Makefiles should go away. I believe I will
> be able to build Axiom in a portable, unified way using only 
> Common Lisp, Latex, and a browser. I'm 
>
>  * rewriting system-dependent subsystems like hyperdoc and graphics
>    into Firefox, thus we don't need libXpm

Which is asking for maintainance nightmare, since:
a) Firefox doesn't work everywhere where libXpm works;
b) Firefox is harder to fix.

>  * simplifying the internals like removing boot so we don't need to
>    depend on pre-stages to build, thus we don't need Makefiles
>  * unifying the concepts so that Axiom reads and understand latex-style 
>    chunks, thus we don't need noweb
>  * documenting everything using latex books, thus we don't need hundreds
>    of tiny .h, .c, .boot, .lisp, and other 1960s development techniques
>
> Axiom is about 1 million "things of code". It used to exist in thousands
> of files, in dozens of subdirectories, with multiple system prerequisites
> and complicated dependencies between the code parts. Autoconf is the
> "right way" to manage that pile. That's a 1990s "solution" to a 1960
> constraint of 4k memory limitations. Believe me, I was there.
>
> Axiom will eventually be 30 books written in Latex and Common Lisp.
> You will need a Latex and a standard Common Lisp and a standard browser.

"Standard browser." Does it mean, it will work in Lynx? w3m? Which one?

> For the moment, as a temporary measure, things that will go away like
> GCL's snapshots, noweb, or libXpm are "supported" in "ad-hoc" ways.

While I agree with some points, other points are simply asking for nightmare.
Autoconf may be bad, but what is there now is even worse. And what is going
to be is hardly any better.

Again, my points:

1. Axiom doesn't work.
- Because Axiom is bound to GCL (which is a piece of s... that doesn't work,
contrary to libXpm and autoconf).
- Because Axiom's build system is maintained ad hoc, even to build it
on another linux distribution you need to contact the author and wait
until he sets up another system.

2. Axiom relies on bundled software to build, which is maintainance
nightmare already.

3. Some goals, like depending on Firefox, are asking for maintainance nightmare.

>From user point of view, you have little understanding of real user needs,
even those, who are ready to try little known CAS.

To port FriCAS and OpenAxiom to Dragonfly the only thing I had to change
was OS name pattern, "*bsd*" to "*bsd*|*dragonfly*" in autoconf script.

To build OpenAxiom on FreeBSD I had to dig out some minor differences in pty
headers and libraries, with help from Gabriel I made it. Graphics (libXpm)
worked fine right off the box.

At the same time I had Firefox broken for about a year, and heard similar
complains even from Ubuntu users (thanks to Firefox' sensitivity to libraries).

_That_ is real experience.


-- 
BECHA...
   CKOPO CE3OH...