Robert Goldman <[email protected]> writes: > Zach Beane wrote: >> A few projects in quicklisp work something like this: >> >> ;;; foo.asd >> >> (defsystem foo ...) >> >> (defsystem foo-extra ...) >> >> >> ;;; bar.asd >> >> (defsystem bar :depends-on (:foo-extra :foo)) >> >> With asdf 2, (asdf:load-system "bar") seems to work fine, I guess >> because asdf 2 does the equivalent of find-system on the elements from >> right-to-left. >> >> With asdf 3, it doesn't seem to work fine, I guess because asdf 3 does >> the equivalent of find-system on the elements from left-to-right. >> >> Are those guesses correct? >> >> What's the best way to have a system definition that works equally well >> in asdf2 and asdf3 in this kind of situation? > > > I feel like I'm missing something. Is there some reason you can't simply > make > > (defsystem foo-extra :depends-on (:foo) > ....) > > ?
If they were in separate files, yes. They aren't. > Even if you *could* get the behavior you wanted out of left-to-right > ordering in the :depends-on slot, this isn't something you should rely > upon. This was relied upon by some projects, and now it doesn't work. Zach
