2009/7/9 Gary King gwk...@metabang.com:
If something along the lines is put it, I would suggest that TRT is to
signal an error and offer restarts to either delete the package or
continue blindly.
I agree and it seems that a named restart would allow XCVB function
correctly, right?
No it
The default for ASDF's *central-registry* in SBCL contains a
(let (...) (when ...))
which can and *will* return NIL in some cases (i.e. when an executable
SBCL image is run).
On the other hand, sysdef-central-registry-search calls
directory-pathname-p on each entry, which assumes that
NIL is an
I use
~/.local/share/common-lisp/systems/
/usr/local/share/common-lisp/systems/
/usr/share/common-lisp/systems/
YMMV.
What about an ASDF_PATH shell variable to be taken from getenv the
first time an asdf:operate is called? (which raises questions as to
how to reset it when you dump an image)
[
2009/9/23 james anderson james.ander...@setf.de:
On 2009-09-24, at 00:06 , Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
james anderson writes:
On 2009-09-23, at 22:03 , Faré wrote:
What about an ASDF_PATH shell variable to be taken from getenv the
first time an asdf:operate is called? (which raises questions
2009/10/5 Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info:
Alternatively, is it possible to modify the portable ASDF distro so that
out of the box it would be capable of not breaking contrib modules?
I did my best in /xcvb/no-asdf to allow the uninstallation of a previous ASDF
such that the new installation
Maybe ASDF is the wrong place to try to standardize testing infrastructure?
I mean, maybe instead the authors of various test infrastructures
should have a common list where they discuss interoperability,
reporting, and a declarative way of specifying dependencies between
test suites, between
While developing XCVB, I was reminded that when you declaim or
compile-toplevel proclaim optimization settings, these settings may
(ccl, allegro) or may not (cmucl, sbcl) persist beyond the compilation
of the current file. To make the build deterministic, XCVB now resets
the settings before every
I ran the tests for asdf. Out of 17, 5 fail on sbcl and 7 on clisp. Oops.
On SBCL, the failures seem related to the pathname redirection of ABL / CLC.
test1.script test2.script test3.script test-force.script
test-static-and-serial.script
On CLISP, the two additional failures are
The cCLan list has apparently become the asdf-devel list.
Is this still where the upstream for split-sequence is? If so, can
this patch be applied? If not, who's in charge?
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
Politics is made up of two words, Poli, which
on one.
I'll check it out.
On Oct 22, 2009, at 12:28 PM, Faré wrote:
I ran the tests for asdf. Out of 17, 5 fail on sbcl and 7 on clisp. Oops.
On SBCL, the failures seem related to the pathname redirection of ABL /
CLC.
test1.script test2.script test3.script test-force.script
test-static
2009/10/26 Tamas Papp tkp...@gmail.com:
Hi,
Suppose I have a library named MYLIBRARY which was installed in the
directory /somewhere/foo/ (eg by ASDF-Install, clbuild or manually by
the user). It has a /somewhere/foo/mylibrary.asd definition file,
which was duly symlinked to mylibrary.asd
The recommended way is to write a trivial .asd file for said library.
The other way is to load this library first thing in your build as
part of your Lisp setup, the same that loads asdf.lisp itself and
configures your central registry and defines your optimization
settings.
Speaking of
2009/10/28 Gary King gwk...@metabang.com:
Speaking of optimization settings, does anyone see any problem with
putting in ASDF something that deterministically (re)sets the
optimization setting before each and any perform operation? Otherwise,
optimization settings will vary wildly depending on
Looks great!
With such minimal and innocuous changes to asdf.lisp itself, I think
applying the patch upstream should be a no-brainer. That said, I don't
have commit access.
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
When all lawful citizens are disarmed, will
I volunteer for the commit bit. I won't do anything far-fetching with
ASDF, but I will
* merge the ECL patch
* accept contribs outside of asdf.lisp itself (e.g. for TEST-OP and DOC-OP).
* try to improve ASDF:
* make it use a configuration file https://bugs.launchpad.net/asdf/+bug/485918
*
:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, but then, I may as well drop the ECL-specific code I inserted to
support upgrade from an older ASDF.
I would say that we can focus on ensuring that ASDF can be upgraded
for ECL = 9.12.1 and leave the older versions out.
Also, I
2009/12/1 Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info:
Sure. Those of you who have patches you want included in the next
release, please re-send them to me, if possible based on my
development repo at
http://common-lisp.net/project/xcvb/git/asdf.git
OK, I will resend.
I got two small documentation
2009/12/1 Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that it is the very design of ASDF that a .asd file is Lisp
source code, and that we thus reuse Lisp as the language to do magic
there. What better way
and .asd sounds sufficient to me, but Gary wrote a lot of
shell scripts I haven't really looked at. I don't have a strong
opinion about the documentation source (perhaps surprisingly).
Best,
R
On Dec 2, 2009, at 20:54, Daniel Herring dherr...@tentpost.com wrote:
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Faré wrote
Having had no feedback for a week, and passing tests, I decided I'd
push what I have so far to the official repository.
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
___
asdf-devel mailing list
asdf-devel@common-lisp.net
So... is anyone against my committing a release that just untabifies
all our Lisp files?
Speak up now, or remain silent forever.
On the other hand, if there's no way to enforce it, then it will
constantly diverge, so the policy becomes annoying.
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau |
2009/12/18 Nikodemus Siivola nikode...@random-state.net:
Some questions and notes:
How do I instrospect *SOURCE-REGISTRY*? The outlined API only puts
stuff there, but doesn't tell me how to read it.
For the moment, I don't have a good story for a public API on how to do that.
But considering
Tobias, do you want to have the commit bit, so you may check in fixes
to the bugs you reported?
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure.
— Robert LeFevre (1911 - 1986)
2009/12/19 Tobias C. Rittweiler t...@freebits.de:
At the moment *ASDF-REVISION* is a DEFVAR which won't be reset on
reloading. The attached patch makes it a DEFPARAMETER, so
*ASDF-REVISION* will reflect the correct version after a self-upgrade.
Well spot. Applied to my development repo.
[
, self-upgradable ASDF once and for
all.
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
The main reason Santa is so jolly is because
he knows where all the bad girls live.
2009/12/19 Nikodemus Siivola nikode...@random-state.net:
2009/12/19 Faré fah...@gmail.com
2009/12/21 Samium Gromoff _deepf...@feelingofgreen.ru:
Fare,
Please consider the patch in the 'missing-definition' branch in
git://git.feelingofgreen.ru/asdf
Applied in my development repo, master branch:
http://common-lisp.net/project/xcvb/git/asdf.git
Candidate for immediate release,
2009/12/21 Tobias C. Rittweiler t...@freebits.de:
Applied in my development repo, master branch:
http://common-lisp.net/project/xcvb/git/asdf.git
Candidate for immediate release, if no one else disagrees.
(The above link is pretty useless.)
What does the patch do?
This link might be
Seeing that ASDF hasn't changed much in the last few weeks, I released
1.375, which contains some documentation changes by Robert Goldman,
and a patch by Samium Gromoff.
Note once again that while willing to accept patches and release
promptly (or not so promptly, it seems, if you don't consider
. — Faré
___
asdf-devel mailing list
asdf-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
I updated the code in my ASDF repository, did a second pass on the
configuration code.
I included some documentation in README.source-registry that probably
should be integrated in the normal ASDF documentation and/or in web
pages.
Can you look at it?
Is anyone interested in updating
2010/1/20 Nick Levine n...@ravenbrook.com:
Your backtrace shows nothing obviously wrong, and if extending the
stack does the trick, the problem is possibly that LW starts with
an extremely small stack and/or does some stack-allocation
optimizations that blow the little stack it has. I
OK, the ASDF my repo now supports source-registry.conf.d as well as
source-registry.conf. I'll commit it upstream by next week unless I
get negative feedback, and hopefully after including some tests.
Note that at least clisp seems confused when matching *.* or
(make-pathname :type :wild :name
Goldman rpgold...@sift.info:
On 1/27/10 Jan 27 -12:50 AM, Faré wrote:
I've just released ASDF 1.501 in the official repository, now with all
the source registry configuration that I previously discussed. It's
currently documented in its own file README.source-registry, rather
than in the general
I just released ASDF 1.600 in the official repository.
Since my last official release 1.502, there is
* AOT replacing ABL. AOT allows you to define a set of pathname
translations in a configuration file.
* Some cleanup of the ECL integration.
* *asdf-revision* has been replaced by *asdf-version*
I applied your two other patches, but this one won't apply, probably
because of redundant whitespace changes.
Please merge it with the latest head on my repo.
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
Amateur bureaucrats are often even worse than professional
| ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
You're currently going through a difficult transition period called Life.
On 4 February 2010 03:04, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 1:23 AM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
I just released
If it's the compile-asdf script hanging instead of exiting, I just
pushed 1.603 that has a fix for running tests in ECL w/o manual
intervention. My apologies. (No functional change to asdf itself, only
to the test script infrastructure.)
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics |
Dear Robert,
However, there is no easy way to have a module update its components
upon dependency change but not have a system update its components upon
dependency change, because a system is a subclass of module.
thanks for your work and congratulations for fixing the bug!
So my path may
| http://fare.tunes.org ]
``why'' is always relative to a model of possible explanations. It is never
an absolute question. Which is precisely what makes it meaningful.
— Faré
___
asdf-devel mailing list
asdf-devel@common-lisp.net
http
On 10 February 2010 00:28, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
I believe my first ASDF patch had a minor buglet that could cause
over-compilation.
Here's the deal: when new TRAVERSE detects that the components of a
module need to have an operation performed on them, it binds a dynamic
On 10 February 2010 18:27, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
OK, I have just pushed an alternative solution to the module dependency
bug, this one (I believe) only triggered by INTRA-system dependencies.
This one is also on the module-depends branch.
A test! This requires a test case
Your fix pushed to 1.622. Oops, this is totally my fault, I kind of
remember removing a similar binding from an earlier version of ASDF
after a refactoring. I didn't understand the subtle way that
*default-pathname-defaults* affects future make-pathname's as well as
merge-pathnames.
On 19 February 2010 10:50, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Would anyone object to augmenting the docstring for
COMPONENT-RELATIVE-PATHNAME?
Currently it's:
Extracts the relative pathname applicable for a particular component.
How about something like:
Returns a pathname for the
On 19 February 2010 06:49, james anderson james.ander...@setf.de wrote:
this problem has been in asdf forever.
i have always just patched it locally, but as i've now thrown a few
things in the net which other folks should be able to build, i
suggested the correction.
Thanks for the
why is this better than to leave names atomic and provide a standard
syntax to parse component relative (sic) pathnames?
Note that my whole last email is a red herring wrt this question. My
last email assumes that Fare's change stays in, and I'm trying to write
it up in the documentation.
1. SPLIT-PATH-STRING is not an ideal name. SPLIT-PATH-STRING is /not/
used on paths, it is used on /names/ (in the ASDF sense of these terms).
An unwary reader of this code might try to apply it to a pathname (as I
originally thought), where it could cause lossage because S-P-S doesn't
On 22 February 2010 01:44, Daniel Herring dherr...@tentpost.com wrote:
Apparently the ASDF-binary-locations (now asdf-output-locations) code
originated from Slime. In Slime, this code allowed a simple loader to put
incompatible fasls in separate paths.
Now that ABL (AOL) is a standard part
I am inclined to agree. I'd be happier if we could just say something like
(:file foo :relative-directory bar)
instead of
(:file bar/foo)
Why? You're just moving the complexity around,
without simplifying the overall design.
Moreover, the astute user is already familiar with /-separated
On 22 February 2010 11:25, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
On 2/22/10 Feb 22 -10:02 AM, Faré wrote:
I am inclined to agree. I'd be happier if we could just say something like
(:file foo :relative-directory bar)
instead of
(:file bar/foo)
Why? You're just moving the complexity
Thanks to Tobias for his several bug reports. I committed fixes to the issues,
building my own ensure-package (in a labels in cl-user, because we don't
have a package in which to do a defun yet).
RPG:
Follow-up question: why do we need the ASDF-EXTENSIONS nickname? Can
we sacrifice this
On Feb 27, 2010, at 19:13 PM, Faré wrote:
Please
1- use the latest ASDF from git
2- have a symlink to lwm64 in your PATH named lispworks
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org
]
The Slogan of Language Independence is often but the pride that
self-ignorant
I darcs pull'ed from http://common-lisp.net/~crhodes/clx which
compiled fine with ASDF 1.627. clx.asd says it's 0.7.2, NEWS says it's
0.7.3, and stassats says it's 0.7.4 (after using diff to confirm).
In any case, I don't have any problem with (:relative) at least, not under SBCL.
Do you have a
Dear James,
On 8 March 2010 11:08, james anderson james.ander...@setf.de wrote:
please find referenced below, a suggestion as to the use cases which
the component pathname computation should support.[1]
specifying :pathname arguments to ASDF components as strings had NEVER
been working
i understand, that in some environments neither logical pathname
designators nor logical pathnames themselves are seen as portable,
but i continue to try to treat them as if they were. so far, with
success. mostly.
I believe logical pathnames as defined in the CLHS are widely
supported, and
b- when the source-file-type of a component is a string, then it will
be the type, and the last /-separated component of the string provides
the name.
This case worries me. It seems to require that every system definer
have a strongish sense of the internals of ASDF, and will give odd
Oh my, the asdf:around fiasco again. ABCL apparently uses an old
version of ASDF to avoid a lot DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION.
Couldn't we instead just have a do-perform function do the wrapping
stuff and call perform gf, and skip that method-combination
complication?
Is there a good reason to
3- for aesthetic reasons, I find that it's nicer if I don't have to
mysteriously do bar/baz but bar/baz-V1.200.lisp. I feel that the
rule .lisp is always added to the filename is simpler and easier for
newcomers to understand than the rule .lisp is added to the filename
iff there isn't a dot
These are not currently portably valid:
* module ./
= remove these entries.
elsewhere it is described that . should work.
? add entries for . to the module and system lists?
As rpg says, I don't know where that somewhere is,
and I suspect it's bogus. If you want non-portable stuff,
you can
On 10 March 2010 09:41, james anderson james.ander...@setf.de wrote:
These are not currently portably valid:
* module ./
ok. ? i don't put them in. or, i put them in and (as i need to
anyway) add machinery to verify error cases?
Don't put them in, since we don't currently catch such
Dear Daniel,
On 2 February 2010 23:01, nunt...@strider2.example.org wrote:
Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
Re: [asdf-devel] Is this necessary in this form? Re: ASDF 1.501
Isn't asdf-output-locations somewhat like a CL pendant to `make install'
if you squint your eyes?
Shouldn't that be an
://fare.tunes.org ]
I object to doing things that computers can do.
— Olin Shivers
On 10 March 2010 00:09, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Sure. Or if you like you can also outline it in text and I will translate.
Whatever works. Cheers.
On Mar 9, 2010, at 22:39, Faré fah
(asdf:initialize-output-translations
`(:asdf-output-translations
(:root (,(truename *default-pathname-defaults*) :implementation-type
What happens to this as the value of *default-pathname-defaults* changes
over time?
Well, Lisp is call-by-value, so this clearly takes the current
On 12 March 2010 10:47, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
1. The manual in several places uses version 1.6 as synonymous with
1.600. But if we are to eat our own dogfood and comply with our own
version-satisfies function,
1.6 ~= (1 6) while
1.600 ~= (1 600)
and 600 6
I have
is not the end of every large-scale software problem;
but it's the beginning to any long-term solution to anyone of them.
Freedom is not the end of every large-scale problem;
but it's the beginning to any long-term solution to anyone of them.
— Faré
OK, thanks. I'll work on this. But note that I still don't know how to
replicate A-B-L with *centralize-binaries* NIL.
I'll make that happen next week.
Actually, I think that (at least on Unix) this mapping may work:
(#p/**/*.* (#p/**/ :implementation #p*.*))
Yay for translate-pathnames:
: Juanjo
I was just thinking how to extend this functionality to user-defined systems
and hit another problem. The goal is to take an ASDF system and prepare a
bundle that contains a PREBUILT-SYSTEM file (*.asd), a library file (*.a or
*.lib) and a FASL (*.fas) This set of files can then be
On 13 March 2010 16:56, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
On 3/13/10 Mar 13 -1:12 PM, Faré wrote:
We could adopt the same algorithm as dpkg or rpm uses for comparing version.
I once implemented it in shell script. Could do it in Lisp...
I confess to not really knowing this algorithm
On 14 March 2010 04:21, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
No, interchangeability means not chance of using the library as it was used.
Not having it means that new ways of loading code and linking it into
executables of libraries should be found. New functions,
Dear Juanjo,
Indeed. This or any other way that does not break current ASDF. What I would
like is seamless integration without imposing something that is prone to
break in the future. Another possibility would be for OUTPUT-FILES to return
two values: the list and an optional second value
On 15 March 2010 10:56, james anderson james.ander...@setf.de wrote:
good afternoon;
this does not sound like a case for specialization. it sounds more
like delegation.
what about hooking an output translator into the components.
if it is there, it is used. if it is not, no translation
Dear James,
thanks. I've cloned your git repo and am using the tests there.
sbcl and ccl seem to work without error.
clisp seems to have trouble with logical pathnames.
ecl 10.2.1 seems to hang. :-(
Other implementations are not found (on my system at least).
In test-init.lisp, I use
(defvar
Should we use :unspecific based on a whitelist of known-working
implementations, or should we just avoid it altogether?
Either of those seems OK to me. I think a blacklist is probably wrong,
just because it's too hard to update.
Agreed.
OTOH, I don't really understand the motivation in
This is invalid as a pathname to an actual file, only valid as
something that you can merge with a pathname that has a type:
(make-pathname :directory directory :name typed-file.type :type nil)
Conversely, this is probably not a good idea for naming a file to
load, as many implementations will
I don't have access to a windows machine or a windows lisp
implementation, but in asdf 1.642, I cargo-culted some paths, based on
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/lw60/LW/html/lw-1316.htm#marker-1026801
and
http://windowsxp.mvps.org/usershellfolders.htm
(which I found by googling for
Attached is a (trivial) patch so that 'run-tests.sh' actually uses the flags
argument.
Thanks. It was applied, and many small bugs were fixed in ASDF 1.647
as I did more testing and improved the test infrastructure.
ABCL now passes the ASDF test suite:
On 17 March 2010 05:20, james anderson james.ander...@setf.de wrote:
On 2010-03-17, at 02:50 , Faré wrote:
ECL LispWorks work for me,
that's nice. ecl has some sort of problem with the test mechanism[0], which
it does not have when i run the pathname tests as originally structured
Juanjo: it is unfortunate that the recent fix to a bug in TRAVERSE led
to breakage of the ECL extension. We'll try our best to accommodate
your needs. Do you know how to fix the breakage on your side, or do
you need us to change something?
Robert: for all purposes, Juanjo counts as one of the
http://ec2-174-129-63-37.compute-1.amazonaws.com/test/log/20100316T233422/ecl-output.txt
On 17 March 2010 10:01, james anderson james.ander...@setf.de wrote:
what might the error in the cited transcript indicate as the cause
for the problem with ecl? here is one entry:
Testing:
http://ec2-174-129-63-37.compute-1.amazonaws.com/test/log/20100316T233422/abcl-output.txt
Testing: test-force.script
Armed Bear Common Lisp 0.18.1
Java 1.6.0_0 Sun Microsystems Inc.
OpenJDK Client VM
Low-level initialization completed in 1.985 seconds.
Startup completed in 3.591 seconds.
in as much as it affects the future and as such only. — Faré
___
asdf-devel mailing list
asdf-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
Done in 1.650.
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane.
— Mark Twain
On 17 March 2010 21:12, R. Matthew Emerson r...@clozure.com wrote:
Some users apparently like
On 18 March 2010 11:09, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
Why not using the scheme
(defpackage :asdf-boot
...)
; all new code using asdf-boot package
; rename package asdf - asdf-old
; rename package asdf-boot - asdf
instead of manually moving the
: Juanjo
I have been reading the list of things that can, have and cannot be done and
it is way more complex than I had expected. Wouldn't it make sense to split
asdf.lisp into two files? asdf-boot.lisp to set up everything _only_ if we
need to redefine ASDF functions, classes and other
On 18 March 2010 16:41, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
This is an idea that has been long floating in the back of my mind, and was
brought back to life by these comments
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/f99a69797eda1caf
The problem is
On 18 March 2010 18:37, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
In other words, I think that supporting ASDF is important, but
ultimately an evolutionary dead-end.
That is hard to read from the project
On 19 March 2010 13:34, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
Thansk for the latest changes, they work like a charm now.
Glad to know it was just a package problem, and thanks to Robert
for the diagnostic and to you for the explanation!
I'm glad it didn't require
The manual already has a What has changed between ASDF 1 and ASDF 2?
section, with the following subsections:
@subsection ASDF can portably name files inside systems and components
@subsection Output translations
@subsection Source Registry Configuration
@subsection Usual operations are made
On 21 March 2010 07:28, Tobias C. Rittweiler t...@freebits.de wrote:
Faré fah...@gmail.com writes:
The manual already has a What has changed between ASDF 1 and ASDF 2?
section, with the following subsections:
@subsection ASDF can portably name files inside systems and components
@subsection
Quick follow-up: I encountered the bug again when testing with 8.2
allegromodern
This suggests there may be 1 bug here. One bug being the fact that
the RESTART throws us into an infinite loop.
That's a bug. I don't know anything about it, though.
It may have already existed, or I may have
On 22 March 2010 22:13, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
I understand about the change to the output, and the not recompiling, but I
think you're not using the standard implementation rewriting rules, because,
e.g., all the modern lisp binaries are going into mlisp, whereas
On 22 March 2010 22:35, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 March 2010 22:13, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Would it be possible to use the normal rewrite rules in the tests?
Sure but then we should either
1- always recompile asdf.lisp (as before)
or
2- copy all
On 19 March 2010 15:24, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you help with the configuration on Windows?
What is the ECL equivalent of LispWorks' get-folder-path?
Or if there isn't one builtin
Gary knows the recipe to recompile the website from source.
I know it involves installing cl-markdown and dependencies, which
clbuild can do for you.
Beyond that, Gary will have to tell us what to do to use the thing.
Gary, can you help?
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics |
-registry
configuration...
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
Majority, n.:
That quality that distinguishes a crime from a law.
On 24 March 2010 04:14, Mark Evenson even...@panix.com wrote:
On 3/23/10 4:53 PM, Faré wrote:
[…]
I hope ABCL has
, Robert Goldman wrote:
On 3/24/10 Mar 24 -1:36 PM, Faré wrote:
You mean, things like
(asdf:system-relative-pathname :xcvb ) or
(asdf:system-relative-pathname :xcvb master.lisp) ?
Should be working well since 1.649.
It's even documented. The example with should be given, though.
Great. I
of which civilization is made.
Anyone who rejects tradition per se should be left naked in a desert island.
— Faré
On 27 March 2010 11:32, Futu Ranon futura...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I wanted to test closure-html so I installed and attempted to load it in
LispWorks 6 on Windows.
CL
.
— Faré
On 27 March 2010 11:32, Futu Ranon futura...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I wanted to test closure-html so I installed and attempted to load it in
LispWorks 6 on Windows.
CL-USER 3 (asdf:load-system 'closure-html)
Error: External format (:UTF-8 :EOL-STYLE :LF) produces characters of type
Dear Mark,
Fare's suggestion that I use an output translation based on the jar
pathname doesn't quite work, because in our current implementation,
the pathname of the jar is stored in DEVICE, separate from the rest
of the jar pathname. I extended PATHNAME-MATCH-P to match jars
correctly, but
One site per system looks like it will quickly pollute the host
namespace. What about we instead use a single logical host with
subdirectories?
#PCOMMON-LISP:SYSTEMS;CL-PPCRE;CL-PPCRE.ASD
The problem I have with this approach with logical pathnames at all is
that I don't understand whether or
There are many things to clarify about logical pathnames and the use
thereof or not, but I don't think this should block a release of ASDF
2. Should it? And so I'd like to declare it an ASDF 2.1 or ASDF 3
issue, and invite you to focus on blocking issues for ASDF 2. (Of
course, if someone has a
1 - 100 of 1393 matches
Mail list logo
