On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Robert Goldman <rpgold...@sift.net> wrote: > On 3/20/16 Mar 20 -7:07 PM, Stas Boukarev wrote: > >> Then I guess SBCL holding back on ASDF upgrades is a good strategy after all. >> > Actually, no. > > The state of affairs on Windows is no worse than before. My going back > to the shell-script based testing simply REVEALS that ASDF and UIOP have > never worked properly on Windows + Cygwin. Nothing about that has > changed: if you run a CL implementation from inside Cygwin, it will > inherit a Cygwin environment. Then RUN-PROGRAM will try to run local > programs using CMD.EXE, with an environment set up for Cygwin. If > you're lucky, it might work. But it's likely that the environment will > have bad pathnames in it, and your use of RUN-PROGRAM will fail. > > Nothing there has changed. The only thing that has changed about that > is that I have announced it. > > So, no, a simple dragging of the feet will not fix this problem. > > The only thing that will fix this problem will be for someone who cares > about Lisp on Windows to commit some time to helping me get ASDF to work > properly on Windows. > > Meanwhile, not updating means that you will fail to see bug fixes like > the recent one that prevents ASDF from causing a stack overflow in the > presence of cycles in the file system (which can be created by symbolic > links, for example). I have seen more than one bug report about this > from an SBCL user. > > Don't kid yourself that there's an easy answer. > I don't use cygwin on windows, does that mean I'm in the clear?
-- With best regards, Stas.
