asdf-devel April 2016

asdf-devel@common-lisp.net

6 participants
5 discussions

Is it possible to load multiple versions of the same system?
by Ian Tegebo 30 Apr '16

30 Apr '16

I've been reading the manual, papers, and slides on ASDF and XCVB. As a frame of reference, I prefer the qualities exhibited by Racket's implementation of modules. I was disappointed both to see XCVB bitrot, and then to see that a major ASDF overhaul would be necessary. That said, ignoring Racket/ASDF/XCVB, I'm curious about how loading multiple versions of the same system could possibly be implemented in Common Lisp (CL). I'm sure people have thought about it, but I'm having a hard time finding references. I'm afraid I've been skimming some of the material linked off of the ASDF and XCVB pages, so forgive me if I missed something. On the JVM, there's the notion of "classloader" that can be used to load multiple versions of the same class. Unfortunately, the only approach I can imagine is to use some form of package renaming. There appear to be several variations floating around [1], and the trade-offs aren't clear to me. If I think about how it might be done in ASDF, it seems like it would require a series of things: * intercept package definition to rename with version * :around-compile to handle some kind of per-system aliasing so code doesn't have to change * teaching dependency resolution how to find the renamed, versioned packages/systems But that's a wild guess. And the more I think about it, I wonder what to do about some code that uses strings to put together a symbol - I don't think symbol-macrolet can help there. [1] implementation-specific package-local-nicknames, :around-compile in ASDF, "pseudonyms" -- Ian Tegebo

4 7

How does one declare non-lisp dependencies?
by Ian Tegebo 28 Apr '16

28 Apr '16

While quickloading IOLib, g++ raised an error because it couldn't find "lfp.h". After digging around a bit, I realized I needed to install libfixposix. It seems like ASDF would already have a way to express this dependency, resulting in a clearer error message. If this doesn't already exist, what's the way to go about it? A :before method on prepare-op for cffi components (or some such, I'm just bluffing here)? -- Ian Tegebo

3 2

question about RUN-PROGRAM
by Robert Goldman 19 Apr '16

19 Apr '16

The DOCSTRING for RUN-PROGRAM says Run program specified by COMMAND, either a list of strings specifying a program and list of arguments, or a string specifying a shell command (/bin/sh on Unix, CMD.EXE on Windows); _synchronously_ process its output as specified and return the processing results when the program and its output processing are complete. So shouldn't RUN-PROGRAM always pass :WAIT T to %RUN-PROGRAM? A colleague of mine anecdotally reported that he wasn't getting output from a call to RUN-PROGRAM until he caught and printed the return value. This is on ALLEGRO, where RUN-PROGRAM invokes EXCL:RUN-SHELL-COMMAND and, I believe, should always be using WAIT, no? Thanks, r

2 1

how to "register it in front of the former"
by Jim Newton 14 Apr '16

14 Apr '16

Can someone help me with an asdf problem I don’t understand. When I load quicklisp I get the warning (below) apparently from ASDF. Advise (b) says that I might: install a newer ASDF and register it in front of the former in your configuration, Can someone explain to me how I can do that? I’m working on a machine where I don’t have administrator rights so I can’t change anything in /usr etc. I’ve installed and compiled sbcl locally, as well as downloaded a local copy of the newest asdf under my home directory. Thanks. Jim WARNING: You are using ASDF version 3.1.3 (probably from (require "asdf") or loaded by quicklisp) and have an older version of ASDF 3.0.2 registered at #P"/usr/local/share/common-lisp/source/asdf/asdf.asd". Having an ASDF installed and registered is the normal way of configuring ASDF to upgrade itself, and having an old version registered is a configuration error. ASDF will ignore this configured system rather than downgrade itself. In the future, you may want to either: (a) upgrade this configured ASDF to a newer version, (b) install a newer ASDF and register it in front of the former in your configuration, or (c) uninstall or unregister this and any other old version of ASDF from your configuration. Note that the older ASDF might be registered implicitly through configuration inherited from your system installation, in which case you might have to specify :ignore-inherited-configuration in your in your ~/.config/common-lisp/source-registry.conf or other source-registry configuration file, environment variable or lisp parameter. Indeed, a likely offender is an obsolete version of the cl-asdf debian or ubuntu package, that you might want to upgrade (if a recent enough version is available) or else remove altogether (since most implementations ship with a recent asdf); if you lack the system administration rights to upgrade or remove this package, then you might indeed want to either install and register a more recent version, or use :ignore-inherited-configuration to avoid registering the old one. Please consult ASDF documentation and/or experts.

3 2

Windows development will get easier
by Robert P. Goldman 02 Apr '16

02 Apr '16

According to O'Reilly, Microsoft will be putting bash onto Windows 10. Given that, I propose we just wait this out instead of enjoying the full misery of translating our scripts to CMD.EXE... Yay! Sent from my iPhone

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

asdf-devel April 2016