asdf-devel September 2016

asdf-devel@common-lisp.net

16 participants
35 discussions

RFC: uniform exit codes
by Elias Pipping 08 Sep '16

08 Sep '16

Dear list, I’d like to talk about exit codes for a bit. The uiop/run-program::%wait-process-result function e.g. currently waits for a process to terminate and then returns something. An exit-code. What would you expect that to be? What would you like it to be? (I’ve already had a long discussion about this with Robert but Faré asked me to take it to the mailing list, too). An exit code should be a number and lie between 0 and 255, with only 0 signalling success, as far as I understand. A ‘return -1’ in C ends up as a 255 once I check for it in lisp or shell. Beyond that there are customs but not standards (there is sysexits.h but it’s not used all that much) Please consider the three shell scripts that each contain just one line: (1) exit 15 (2) kill $$ (3) sh -c ‘kill $$’ If you saved them in separate scripts and ran them from within a shell, the exit code would be 15/143/143. The take-away messages from that for me are that - the shell uses 128+n if the process dies in response to signal n - there are cases where the exit code is greater than 128 even though the process itself did not die in response to a signal, thereby interfering with this logic - the shell cannot distinguish (2) and (3) From within lisp, often but not always (2) and (3) can be distinguished. Sometimes, a process-wait function will return something like 15/(0 15)/(143 0) for the above examples(*); sometimes a process-status function will report (:exited 15)/(:signaled 15)/(:exited 143). But some implementations will behave like the shell and always return 15/143/143, e.g. ABCL, LispWorks <7, and Allegro CL with :wait t. So the thing that we can reliably do is produce the sequence 15/143/143. Please note that even this baseline is already a proposal for a change: With today’s UIOP master branch, you could also get things such as 15/15/143, 15/0/143, or 15/:sigterm/143, if I’m not mistaken. What we could not reliably do is e.g. return things like 15/-15/143 or (15 :exited)/(15 :signaled)/(143 :exited). What I’ve implemented so far is a compromise. Some platforms might return 15/(143 15)/143 and others just 15/143/143. The (143 15) could easily be turned into (143 :signaled) instead, that’s a matter of taste, the take-away message remains, though, that you couldn’t be sure that what you think is case (2) isn’t really case (3). So that leaves also the option of “let’s just not bother with distinguishing the two”. Looking forward to your feedback, Elias (*) I’m using (x y) as a short-hand for (values x y) here, rather than (list x y)

2 2

set variables before executing the "test-op"
by Alexey Veretennikov 07 Sep '16

07 Sep '16

Hi all, I am using cl-project to generate project skeleton for the library including separate asd file for unit tests. The test framework I use is the default for cl-project: prove. Using this framework I would like to set some special variables to control test execution _before_ running the asdf:test-system i.e. (setf prove.color:*enable-colors* nil) (setf prove:*default-reporter* :tap) But the problem is when I set them directly in .asd file, the CL reader complains what the prove.color and prove packages do not exist (which is true, since the prove dependency is not yet loaded). I could set them in every test file, but I would like to set them globally. How could I set them after the dependency to unit test library (prove) is loaded and therefore package exists? This is what I have in .asd file for tests: :defsystem-depends-on (:prove-asdf) :perform (test-op :after (op c) (funcall (intern #.(string :run-test-system) :prove-asdf) c) (asdf:clear-system c))) Br /Alexey

4 6

New committer: Elias Pipping
by Faré 04 Sep '16

04 Sep '16

With Robert's assent, I gave committer rights to Elias Pipping on the ASDF repository on https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf — Welcome, Elias! Elias, I suggest you keep working in branches and have your code reviewed. Actually, I should probably start doing the same, now that you're here to review my code! (Not that I intend —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong. — H. L. Mencken

2 1

Re: Version 3.1.7.7 has been pushed
by Robert Goldman 02 Sep '16

02 Sep '16

On 8/21/16 Aug 21 -7:49 PM, Elias Pipping wrote: > Dear Robert, dear list, > > I’m happy to see the first changes to run-program in ASDF-3.1.7.7. I’m now working more pragmatically towards making others mergeable. As usual, the list can be viewed at > > https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/merge_requests/3 > > As of right now, it looks like this: > > 8e4f7fd Add and use process-info class > ec74b27 Add %if-on-lispworks?+ > ba8c24e Bug fix: Exit code with LispWorks 7 > a35fbe2 Bug fix: Store exit code with Allegro CL > 104da21 Change :if-*-exists default to :supersede > 4ef7409 Add and use not-implemented-error > 6359a4b Add file-stream*-p > c2d5de3 Add and use parameter-error. Reorganise errors. > 7ae0bcf Fix warnings on ABCL, etc. > fb3dd9a Add and use close-streams > 4971606 Add %process-info-*put getters > c7570da Tests: Cover %run-program and %wait-process-result > 1f43e5d Do not pass unnecessary keywords to SBCL Should we have another iteration on this, putting it into a topic branch and letting me test it on Windows, Mac, and Linux? TBH, I have never used merge requests on gitlab or github (except as submitting them), so I don't know the workflow from the recipient side. My use of git is mostly limited to command-line. best, r

4 17

Pushed ASDF 3.1.7.8: fixes for CLISP, etc.
by Faré 02 Sep '16

02 Sep '16

Sam Steingold (sds) probed me on some old bugs, which led me to waste a day debugging issues on and with CLISP. First I reproduced CLISP bug 677, figured out what CLISP was doing wrong (incorrect merging of logical pathnames in compile-file), and implemented a workaround (physicalize everything I can, trust compile-file's return value over my :output-file argument): https://sourceforge.net/p/clisp/bugs/677/ Then, I found a cleaner fix to the issue with DIRECTORY wanting "*" rather than "*.*" as the match-all pattern on CLISP and GCL. I also dug out the information in the old README.md that Robert stripped. I moved anything that may have been redundant with doc/index.html, move there what was complementary, and put back in README.md (after some editing) things that were not covered by either the home page or the manual: the documentation on how to navigate our source code, build and test ASDF, etc. Robert, please tell me if that's OK, since you were the one who deleted that information arguing of unmaintainable redundancy with web page and manual. I also slightly tweaked said web page and manual. Also, I see you disabled make doc in the Makefile. I presume it should be restored. Finally, I renamed make.bat to make-asdf.bat so that on Windows there is no risk of typing "make" and run make.bat in the current directory while believing one had run make.exe from the %PATH%. This may or may not help Robert make his tests pass on Windows. —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org ...so this guy walks into a bar. "The usual, Mr. Descartes?" the barman asked. "I think not," Rene replied, and promptly disappeared.

5 11

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

asdf-devel September 2016