From ... Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!134.222.94.5!npeer.kpnqwest.net!nreader1.kpnqwest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: Q: LispWorks on SuSE 7.2? References: Mail-Copies-To: never From: Erik Naggum Message-ID: <3204795864559866@naggum.net> Organization: Naggum Software, Oslo, Norway Lines: 37 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 13:04:28 GMT X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@Norway.EU.net X-Trace: nreader1.kpnqwest.net 995807068 193.71.66.1 (Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:04:28 MET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:04:28 MET DST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.lisp:13413 * Mark Watson > I installed SuSE 7.2 last night (wonderful, BTW, with good true type font > support, automatic recognition of IDE CD-R, etc.), and everything is > great except LispWorks 4120 Personal segfaults (11) on sartup. I > installed lesstif (very new verion) before the LW install. > > Any ideas? With a GNU/Debian system using Linux kernel 2.4.6, glibc 2.2.3, xfree 4.0.3 and a statically linked motif of some unknown kind and version, the Personal Edition of LispWorks does not segfault. It has about a billion other annoying problems and disobeys or over-obeys X resources (for fun, try setting *BorderWidth to _any_ value), some of which are extremely hard to figure out how to correct, and is generally such a pain even to try out that I have dropped the option of using it in addition to Allegro CL. I have probably spent more time trying to get it to behave than I have spent getting _sendmail_ to behave. Admittedly, a software package that presents itself with "we know which fonts and colors and shit you hate and we chose them for your first impression" must do a lot of good work to make up for it, but when documentation files are unreadable because they were installed under a non-existing user with user-only permiessions (nice work! not only are they not that interesting or informative, did they not _want_ people to read them?), the web browser interaction somehow manages to avoid reusing running browser images even after I figured out why launching the web browser mysteriously failed to use the $PATH environment variable and debugging from failure to launch it did not reveal the variable that was used to construct the bogus path, you _really_ have to work hard to make me want to investigate further. Unix users are not Windows monkeys, guys. Those who came to Linux from Windows could maybe tolerate this, but those who came to Linux from Unix most probably will not, like so much other Windows-like cruft in Linux. #:Erik -- There is nothing in this message that under normal circumstances should cause Barry Margolin to announce his moral superiority over others, but one never knows how he needs to behave to maintain his belief in it.