Return-Path: Delivery-Date: Received: from dworshak.cs.uidaho.edu (no rfc931) by swan.cl.cam.ac.uk with SMTP (PP-6.5) outside ac.uk; Fri, 24 Sep 1993 16:39:51 +0100 Received: by dworshak.cs.uidaho.edu (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA29702; Fri, 24 Sep 93 08:20:33 -0700 Sender: info-hol-request@cs.uidaho.edu Errors-To: info-hol-request@cs.uidaho.edu Precedence: bulk Received: from ganymede.inmos.co.uk by dworshak.cs.uidaho.edu with SMTP (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA29698; Fri, 24 Sep 93 08:20:30 -0700 Received: from frogland.inmos.co.uk by ganymede.inmos.co.uk; Fri, 24 Sep 93 15:51:25 BST From: David Shepherd Message-Id: <20504.9309241519@frogland.inmos.co.uk> Subject: Re: HOL 88 or 90 for Solaris 2.x To: info-hol@cs.uidaho.edu (info-hol mailing list) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1993 16:19:51 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: <199309241421.AA00335@caliban.serg.cse.unsw.edu.au> from "Ken Robinson" at Sep 25, 93 00:21:32 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1066 Ken Robinson has said: > > Has anyone ported HOL to Solaris 2 Sparc? > > I assume that HOL90 would be the easier to port since the base SML is already > ported to Solaris. > > Also where do I find HOL90? > > Thanks, > > Ken Robinson given that SMLofNJ is (claimed to be) ported to Solaris (though I think at present you have to grab a set of patches, then hol90 will build as is ... hol90 is just a large SML program. Similarily, if the relevant lisps have been ported to Solaris then hol88 will almost certainly build. The other alternative, which I'm using, is to apply the rule "if it ain't broke don't fix it", and am resisting all attempts to move to Solaris (include SunOS 4.1.2 in that as well :-). -------------------------------------------------------------------------- david shepherd: des@inmos.co.uk tel: 0454-616616 x 625 inmos ltd, 1000 aztec west, almondsbury, bristol, bs12 4sq "They didn't like the rates, they don't like the poll tax, and they won't like the council tax." - Nicholas Ridley