Is there any chance for specification of the "core ASDF protocol" - subset guaranteed to not change every few years, so one may write today systems which will be loadadable in the future?
Regards, Daniel Faré writes: > This is totally intentional and well-documented. > > Do NOT use the central-registry if you don't know what you're doing. Use > the source-registry as recommended. (Or, if you truly insist, reinitialize > the central-registry after upgrade; upgrading from ASDF 2 will create a > fresh ASDF package; see asdf/tools/load-asdf.lisp for how to load ASDF > while supporting backward compatibility back to ASDF 1 the hard way). > > Do NOT use ASDF 2.26 (from October 2012), ever. Help me convince Xach to > stop distributing that bitrotting piece of maintenance nightmare. > Seriously, it's a shame that Quicklisp isn't distributing ASDF 3.1.7 (from > May 2016), which is the very stable culmination of the 3.1 series and works > great with all its systems. And I totally understand that Quicklisp must be > conservative and should not upgrade to the latest 3.2.1 (from April 2017) > yet. Considering how badly ASDF 2.26 now behaves when trying to load > systems from Quicklisp, I wonder if Xach even ever tests it; I bet not. > Alternatively, to show how utterly ridiculous his attitude is, convince him > to distribute ASDF 1.85 (from May 2004) instead, the perfect gem that Dan > Barlow bequeathed us (). Or no more recent 1.366 (from September 2009), the > last version wholly untainted by my code contributions. > > -#f > > > On May 3, 2017 2:23 PM, "James M. Lawrence" <llmjj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Starting with a bare lisp image (e.g --no-userinit --no-sysinit for > SBCL), the following signals a "component not found" error: > > (load "asdf-2.26.lisp") > ;;; or whatever system you want > (push #p"~/quicklisp/dists/quicklisp/software/alexandria-20170227-git/" > asdf:*central-registry*) > (load "asdf-3.2.1.lisp") > (asdf:load-system "alexandria") > > The first bad commit is https://github.com/fare/asdf/commit/3a9457a > > I hope this wasn't intentional? Ideally an old asdf version would > never get loaded, but practically speaking it sometimes does (e.g. on > LispWorks PE and CLISP). And if that happens, thereafter one is unable > to load a system that requires asdf-3. The above case is a > whittled-down version of a quickloading problem. > > Best, > lmj -- Daniel Kochmański ;; aka jackdaniel | Przemyśl, Poland TurtleWare - Daniel Kochmański | www.turtleware.eu "Be the change that you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi
