Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.apps Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!bnr.co.uk!uknet!festival!edcogsci!richard From: richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) Subject: Re: Anybody made akcl-1-625? Message-ID: <CtwosL.3Ar@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh References: <AH6QBAUW@math.fu-berlin.de> <CttvvB.C3x@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <GD7QBDG@math.fu-berlin.de> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 1994 11:48:21 GMT Lines: 24 In article <GD7QBDG@math.fu-berlin.de> gusw@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Gunther Shadow) writes: >Thank's for the hint, but I think 1-615 is a bit outdated. True, but it should tell you what you need to know for unexec. > The real problem is, that I don't want to link with -static, but >I want to get a dynamic -- and thus a more efficient -- akcl. I don't see the point. It isn't going to be much smaller (a few tens of K perhaps) and certainly no faster. Dynamic executables aren't more "efficient" except in terms of size (they're slower), and unless you're linking with some huge library (eg X) the size difference will be negligible for a system as big as KCL. I believe the FSF have taken over AKCL as Gnu Common Lisp, so they might use the code from Emacs, but really I think you're wasting your time. -- Richard -- Richard Tobin, HCRC, Edinburgh University R.Tobin@ed.ac.uk Ooooh! I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.