Using CL with Linux or Hurd
Mon, 28 Apr 97 10:34:44 EDT
From: Richard Coleman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
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.