Using CL with Linux or Hurd

Scott McKay
Mon, 28 Apr 97 10:34:44 EDT

    From: Richard Coleman <>
    Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 19:15:40 -0400
    Ok... it seems there is a fairly good consensus
    that using Common Lisp such as CMU-CL is the way to
    go.  So let's proceed with this assumption at this
Well... I think you would be better off considering Scheme or a
smaller, layered Lisp such as EuLisp.  A microkernel implemented in
CL would probably be about 8meg...

    Next is the choice of base OS.
    1) Flux toolkit - most people believe this is too
       ambitious, and I agree.  It would be different it
       this was a funded project with full-time programmers.
    2) Linux - next alternative is using a minimal Linux distribution as
       a base and then proceeding from there.  Phase 1 would be
       to just create a small Linux distribution with CMU-CL installed.
       This would give people writing applications a place to
       start.  This could be started fairly quickly.
    3) Hurd - now that glibc 2.03 is out, I'm assuming Hurd 0.2 is
       coming soon (at least that's what I heard TB say).  First this
       would require porting CMU-CL to the Hurd (which is useful in its
       own right).  Then it would proceed like version 2 above.  The
       nice thing here is that you could be running both the lispOS
       environment and the standard environment at the same time (great
       for debugging).  Also, given the architecture of the Hurd, parts
       of lispOS could be useful to people who have no interest in lisp
       (such as using translators written in lisp).
    Both version 2 and 3 would be interesting directions to proceed,
    although I'm leaning for 3.