- asdf-devel - mailman3.common-lisp.net

[asdf-devel] patch for the manual to add :if-component-dep-fails to the grammar
by Robert P. Goldman 15 Oct '10

15 Oct '10

If someone with the commit bit sees this, will you please skim it and push it? My git repo is in some horrible state following on my last push where it steadfastly resists all of my attempts to turn this into a fast-forward (pushable) patch. thanks, r

1 1

[asdf-devel] asdf-utilities
by Lou Vanek 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

Hi, I'm setting up a new lisp system on a new debian lenny machine and one of the lisp libraries I'm trying to load is asking to load the asdf-utilities package, but this package doesn't exist. My Google-fu can't find it either. Not sure what I'm missing. I'm using the latest version of openmcl/clozure/ccl from trunk. The asdf version that loads is 2.009. I believe asdf is included with ccl. Appreciate any ideas. Thanks, Lou Vanek P.S. I may not be able to respond immediately to any response since my internet connection currently depends on wardriving until I find something unsecured.

2 2

[asdf-devel] documentation about ASDF configuration
by Attila Lendvai 13 Oct '10

13 Oct '10

dear list, the issue of ASDF configuration came up on sbcl-devel. it's already documented at: http://common-lisp.net/project/asdf/asdf.html#Configuring-ASDF i've found it too verbose compared to what it's all about, or at least too much written in the form of prose. as if it was written for people who first meet the concept of system definitions and library loading itself. imho, the usefulness of a documentation is determined by two things: - how quickly readers find an answer for a specific question - how much the documentation is structured so that it helps reading a topic in different levels of detail. like: - getting a bird's view (e.g. only reading the sub-chapter titles) - reading the first paragraph of each chapter - reading a whole chapter of interest also note that the readers of the ASDF documentation (and ASDF users) are 90+% experienced programmers. so, i suggest to seriously shorten the configuration chapter, or to split the documentation into a verbose one for newcomers, and a highly structured one for people who have an idea what they are dealing with, just don't know which knob to turn in which direction. if we don't split, then at least focus on the latter. these are based on my personal experience reading the doc. and a specific suggestion: the inherit-configuration feature was not obvious and i misunderstood it. the two possible interpretation: - insert here the rest of what is defined in the standard configuration files (the right one) - insert here the current value of the source-registry. IOW, let me append or prefix some configuration entries (the way i misunderstood it) but ASDF2 is definitely a great improvement, thanks a whole lot for the work! -- attila ps: i know i should provide patches instead, so i quickly shut up now because i don't know ASDF enough to confidently edit its documentation.

2 1

[asdf-devel] asdf-utilities
by Lou Vanek 12 Oct '10

12 Oct '10

Hi, I'm setting up a new lisp system on a new debian lenny machine and one of the lisp libraries I'm trying to load is asking to load the asdf-utilities package, but this package doesn't exist. Was this included with ASDF1 and not ASDF2? If so, how do people work around those libraries that require asdf-utilities? I'm using the latest version of openmcl/clozure/ccl from trunk. The asdf version that loads is 2.009. I believe asdf is included with ccl. Appreciate any ideas. Thanks, Lou Vanek

5 8

Re: [asdf-devel] asdf-utilities
by Lou Vanek 11 Oct '10

11 Oct '10

I fixed the asdf-utilities issue by updating the metabang-bind library from darcs. The version number didn't change but obviously something was updated.

1 0

[asdf-devel] ASDF 2 questions
by Didier Verna 10 Oct '10

10 Oct '10

[ Please, Cc: me as I'm not on the mailing list ] Hi, I'm trying to upgrade my CL configuration to ASDF 2, and I have several questions: 1/ why isn't "source-registry.conf" named "asdf-source-registry.conf" ? 2/ Should we understand that the convention of having a "systems" directory with .asd files symlinked there is now obsolete ? I still prefer to keep that because I can select which of the installed sources I do want to be seen. I guess you could also use exclude patterns for doing so, but it seems way more complicated. Comments ? 3/ The following contents for source-registry.conf fails: (:source-registry (:directory (merge-pathnames "share/common-lisp/systems/" (user-homedir-pathname))) (:directory "/usr/local/share/common-lisp/systems") (:directory "/usr/share/common-lisp/systems") :inherit-configuration) Am I to understand that this file cannot really contain Lisp code (and so I couldn't use #'merge-pathnames)? Because in that case, this sucks. I have several machines on which $HOME is different (e.g. /home/ or /Users/, and no, I don't want to create a /home/ -> /Users/ symlink on my Macs) 4/ I'm also struggling with the output translations. I'm happy with the default settings (using .cache/blabla) except for one case. For lisp files located under ~/Science/Source/Common Lisp/ (recursively), I want the compiled files to remain at the same place, under an implementation-specific subdirectory, like asdf-binary-locations did for me before. For instance, ~/Science/Source/Common Lisp/foo/bar/baz.lisp would produce somthing like: ~/Science/Source/Common Lisp/foo/bar/sbcl-1.0.32.30-linux-x86-64/baz.fasl I tried this: (:output-translations ("/Users/didier/Science/Source/Common Lisp/" (:current-directory :implementation)) :inherit-configuration) but this doesn't work. SBCL says: This is SBCL 1.0.42.52, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp. More information about SBCL is available at <http://www.sbcl.org/>. SBCL is free software, provided as is, with absolutely no warranty. It is mostly in the public domain; some portions are provided under BSD-style licenses. See the CREDITS and COPYING files in the distribution for more information. ; loading system definition from ; /usr/local/lib/sbcl/sb-bsd-sockets/sb-bsd-sockets.asd into #<PACKAGE "ASDF0"> ASDF could not load sb-grovel because :CURRENT-DIRECTORY fell through ETYPECASE expression. Wanted one of ((EQL :DEFAULT-DIRECTORY) (EQL :SYSTEM-CACHE) (EQL :USER-CACHE) (EQL :HOME) (EQL :ROOT) CONS STRING PATHNAME).. ASDF could not load asdf-install because Error while trying to load definition for system sb-bsd-sockets from pathname /usr/local/lib/sbcl/sb-bsd-sockets/sb-bsd-sockets.asd: :CURRENT-DIRECTORY fell through ETYPECASE expression. Wanted one of ((EQL :DEFAULT-DIRECTORY) (EQL :SYSTEM-CACHE) (EQL :USER-CACHE) (EQL :HOME) (EQL :ROOT) CONS STRING PATHNAME).. debugger invoked on a LOAD-SYSTEM-DEFINITION-ERROR: Error while trying to load definition for system sb-bsd-sockets from pathname /usr/local/lib/sbcl/sb-bsd-sockets/sb-bsd-sockets.asd: :CURRENT-DIRECTORY fell through ETYPECASE expression. Wanted one of ((EQL :DEFAULT-DIRECTORY) (EQL :SYSTEM-CACHE) (EQL :USER-CACHE) (EQL :HOME) (EQL :ROOT) CONS STRING PATHNAME). So what's the magick ? 5/ Finally, I would like confirmation that ASDF now handles outdated fasl's correctly, and we don't need to do the black magick ourselves. Thanks a lot ! -- Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated. Scientific site: http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier Music (Jazz) site: http://www.didierverna.com

3 7

[asdf-devel] Incrementally extending the source registry?
by Zach Beane 09 Oct '10

09 Oct '10

Say I download a tarball that has a number of projects in it: $ tar xzvf fooprojects.tgz fooprojects/neato/neato.asd fooprojects/neato/neato.lisp fooprojects/stuff/stuff.asd fooprojects/stuff/stuff.lisp fooprojects/xyz/xyz.asd fooprojects/xyz/xyz.lisp If these are now unpacked in ~/src/fooprojects/, how can I add that tree to my ASDF source registry by calling ASDF functions? Say a few minutes later I download another tarball with a number of projects in it: $ tar xzvf barprojects.tgz barprojects/awesome/awesome.asd barprojects/awesome/awesome.lisp barprojects/stump/stump.asd barprojects/stump/stump.lisp barprojects/tapper/tapper.asd barprojects/tapper/tapper.lisp If these are now unpacked in ~/src/barprojects/, how can I add that tree to my ASDF soruce registry by calling ASDF functions, without losing the previous fooprojects registration? Thanks, Zach

3 5

[asdf-devel] The Manual
by Dave Penton 04 Oct '10

04 Oct '10

Greetings. I am writing regarding a post from R. Goldman last year on this mailing list. (I just today subscribed to the list.) My question may already have been canvassed elsewhere. If so point me to the appropriate thread. I am not very adept at picking through the list archives, or maybe I'm just lazy.... Here is the relevant quotefrom the earlier post: > Alas, the manual does not seem to clarify this. This, I think is a > problem with the manual's design. In the discussion of DEFSYSTEM we > have two example pages, and then we have the grammar. The grammar > specifies the /syntax/ of defsystem, but there really isn't any way to > specify the /semantics/ of bits of defsystem. Note that the operations > (object model) bit of the manual does /not/ serve this purpose. It > would be OK for us to specify the semantics in terms of those > operations, but we do not do so. If we were to do so we would need to > add a section that bridges from the syntax to the object model by > specifying how the syntax gets rewritten into the object model. I was thrilled to find this comment - it addresses my concern directly. My question is: Has anyone followed up on this? A manual section on the semantics of defsystem is sorely needed. I am fairly new to Common Lisp (one year). Like most developers I need some kind of system definition facility but find myself a bit exasperated learning to use asdf. My opinion (expressed with gratitude for the efforts of developers and documenters of asdf) is that Chapter 5 talks all around the thing that I most want to know, viz. "What does defsystem do?" After a couple of examples, probably the manual should then contain an informal description of defsystem semantics. I know, of course, that it means to allow one to define a "system." But how? What is the strategy, and how do the bits of the defsystem form implement that strategy? To illustrate my point, I stopped reading and started to grind my teeth a little when I hit this sentence in section 5.3: "The method-form tokens need explaining...." Probably they do need explaining. But at that point the manual has given no context in which to understand an explanation. The next few lines do not actually constitute an explanation in any case. (Or maybe they do. I can be dense sometimes :-) Why is it that I should want to :perform something or :explain something :after? Maybe I also want to :deep-fry something :before or :exchange-mana :around something? (Ok, now I'm being snotty...sorry.) If I were not a relative beginner to Common Lisp I might try to contribute some draft manual sections for consideration by the maintainers. However, I fear that my efforts would only increase the turbidity level. So: Has anyone followed up on this, or does someone intend to do so? Best, - Dave -

3 3

[asdf-devel] FInding a system file in the current directory
by Dave Penton 03 Oct '10

03 Oct '10

Can asdf find a file containing a system definition in the current working directory? (Yes, I have read ch.7 of the manual. It may start to make sense on the third reading, but so far not much joy :-) - Dave -

3 2

[asdf-devel] defsystem behaviour
by Daniel Barlow 01 Oct '10

01 Oct '10

Apologies for the complete lack of references headers in this mail, but I'm not subscribed to asdf-devel and only see this message in the common-lisp.net archive. On 9/13/10 Sep 13 -8:05 AM, Serhiy Yakovyn wrote: > Is this done intentionally? Robert Goldman rpgoldman at sift.info wrote: > Yes, this is done intentionally. Canonical (i.e., what you get when you > translate a symbol) names for ASDF systems (and other ASDF components) > are downcased. > I /suspect/ (I am not privy to the intentions of the original developer) > that this is because the downcased names --- this policy is applied not > just to systems, but to other components as well --- map better to the way people use modern file-systems. This is, or was once, or should be, a matter of record. I don't know where asdf is currently hosted nor how far back the revision history there goes, but if you look at a sufficiently ancient version of asdf/README you should find something like 122 *** Component Attributes 123 124 **** A name (required) 125 126 This is a string or a symbol. If a symbol, its name is taken and 127 lowercased. The name must be a suitable value for the :name initarg 128 to make-pathname in whatever filesystem the system is to be found. 129 130 The lower-casing-symbols behaviour is unconventional, but was selected 131 after some consideration. Observations suggest that the type of 132 systems we want to support either have lowercase as customary case 133 (unix, mac, windows) or silently convert lowercase to uppercase 134 (lpns), so this makes more sense than attempting to use :case :common, 135 which is reported not to work on some implementations -dan

2 1