Re: [Chicken-hackers] Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken 2.41 for Debian stable (3.1)

[Ivan Raikov]

  Alright, I will make sure that I can build Debian packages out of
the Chicken 2.5 source, and I will commit the Debian scripts to the
repository, with the new description. Can anyone tell me what's
involved in maintaining a working Texinfo file?

"Brandon J. Van Every" <address@hidden> writes:

>
> Felix made a decision to stop providing Texinfo documentation.
> Perhaps you should talk to him about reinstating it, and helping with
> that?  I've had my own issues with "how easy is it to build a distro
> with docs?" now that everything is going wiki-oriented.  I'm not
> exactly up on it now... don't really want to be, either.  I'd help
> patch the CMake build any way it needs to be done, but I don't want to
> drop what I'm doing and chase this problem.
>
> What am I worried about right now?  Well, I'm fed up with XEmacs, and
> I don't like Eclipse either.  When I try to use MinGW with it, it just
> doesn't work, and I'm tired of chasing broken crap projects.  Eclipse
> is fine for the things people use it for, actually quite good, but it
> doesn't look like it's a powerhouse of MinGW compatibility.  So I'm
> looking at various open source MinGW IDEs, with an eye to integrating
> Chicken and CMake support.  Currently I'm looking at Ultimate++ as the
> guinea pig.
>
> Yeah, I'd need to see it in Darcs to bother with it.  But, I cannot be
> a Debian maintainer.  I have no Linux and don't plan to have one any
> time soon.  I don't feel good about checking anything into Darcs
> without testing, so I'll leave that to someone with the means and
> gumption to do it.
>
> I would simply lift Chicken's description from the homepage:
>
> "CHICKEN is a compiler for the Scheme programming language. CHICKEN
> produces portable, efficient C, supports almost all of the current
> Scheme language standard, R5RS and includes many enhancements and
> extensions. CHICKEN runs on MacOS X, Windows, and many Unix flavours."