On 6/7/06, Andy Cristina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Luis Oliveira says: > This would require a better asdf-install, btw. Someone's working on > that. :-) > > I say: > Please, please tell me that they are thinking of windows when they > write this, and are avoid ing making assumptions about unix directory > structures. And using something other than GNU tar.
On this point, it might be helpful to send some polite email to the asdf-install dev list[1] enumerating what folks see as problems under Windows. And maybe some patches illustrating proposed solutions. I have some opinions on this myself[2], seeing the issue from both sides (as a library developer and library user), and I certainly should follow my own advice. Getting back to one of the points Luís made, the meta-package guidelines could help if they addressed Windows compatibility where appropriate. -- Jack Unrue [1] http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-install-devel [2] For example, I think it's not so much the GNU tar and gz file formats that are problematic, but rather that AFAIK there are no portable Lisp implementations of those, hence asdf-install on Windows requires cygwin or similar compatibilty layer. One can debate the technical merits of various archive formats all day long, but the fact is that tar.gz is an established precedent as far as asdf-install is concerned. _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
