[Openmcl-devel] Launcher script should guess the architecture

[Bill St. Clair]

I stopped using the startup scripts a few years back, when I discovered
that the setting of CCL_DEFAULT_DIRECTORY was no longer necessary. I now
fetch CCL to a convenient directory, e.g. /usr/local/ccl-1.6/, and do:

  sudo ln -s /usr/local/ccl-1.6/lx86cl64 /usr/local/bin/ccl

If I wanted 32-bit CCL, it'd leave off the "64", and maybe name the
soflink ccl-32. Sometimes I override the global install with a soft-link
in ~/bin/

This may well not be kosher, but it works for me.

-Bill

On 06/23/11 22:37, Eitarow Fukamachi wrote:
> Alright, I understood your thought about that, and I felt you are right.
> It might not give any helps to newcomers.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> --
> Eitarow Fukamachi
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Gary Byers <gb at clozure.com> wrote:
>> The manual suggests that people who can run a 64-bit version and don't
>> care about running the 32-bit version might want to just rename the "ccl64"
>> shell script.
>>
>> I'd guess that the original poster is right in suggesting that newcomers
>> find
>> this confusing, but I think that that may be because people from different
>> backgrounds have different levels of comfort/familarity with using the shell
>> ("copy this file to a directory that's on your shell's search path" may be a
>> simple thing for some people and a big mystery for others.)
>>
>> I don't have a good sense for what things newcomers find confusing (as
>> far as I can tell, it depends on the newcomer and everyone can be
>> confused about things that most other people aren't.)  I'm really
>> skeptical that the fact that there are two shell scripts instead of
>> one has much of an effect on this: that seems like a simple concept
>> to understand (even if "use chmod to ensure that the file is executable"
>> isn't.)
>>
>> If a single script defaulted to selecting the 64-bit version if it looked
>> like the OS allowed that, that script would need some way of overriding
>> the default (a "-32" arg or something like that.)  It's not clear that
>> being able to say:
>>
>> ccl
>> ccl -32
>>
>> is a whole lot better or worse than the status quo (or that installing and
>> editing one shell script in /usr/local/bin is preferable or significantly
>> simpler than doing that twice is.)  This is all a relatively minor thing,
>> but I'd feel a lot more enthused about changing the documentation, changing
>> my habits, and asking people to change theirs than I do if I thought that
>> the proposed change was significnantly better (for somebody) than the status
>> quo, and at this point I just don't see that.
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Jun 2011, Raffael Cavallaro wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 23, 2011, at 8:48 PM, Leo wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is not unreasonable to assume that most of the time they want 64 on
>>>> 64-bit machine.
>>>
>>> In any event, all of this is easily customized by either editing or
>>> renaming the scripts, using an alias in your .bash_profile, using a symlink,
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> warmest regards,
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Raffael Cavallaro
>>> raffaelcavallaro at me.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Openmcl-devel mailing list
>>> Openmcl-devel at clozure.com
>>> http://clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openmcl-devel mailing list
>> Openmcl-devel at clozure.com
>> http://clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Openmcl-devel mailing list
> Openmcl-devel at clozure.com
> http://clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel