Faré <[email protected]> writes: > Do we want to (a) leave run-shell-command half-broken on various > combination of OSes and implementations as soon as any argument needs > quoting, do we want to (b) use heavy artillery to solve the problem > correctly, or should we not just (c) delete this broken functionality > that obviously nobody can or should be relying on for anything > serious? > > My preference goes to (c) delete the damn thing (replacing the > function body by an error that suggests a good replacement), but only > if it doesn't create a quagmire for users.
My preference is to leave it as-is. > Xach - would it be easy for you to test Quicklisp with a version of > ASDF without run-shell-command (or fmakunbound'ing it early on) and > see if anything breaks? Of Quicklisp projects, it breaks CommonQT, elephant, gsll, umlisp, and cl-gene-searcher. Zach _______________________________________________ asdf-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
