asdf-devel

asdf-devel@common-lisp.net

1 participants
1378 discussions

Re: How to fix arnesi:clean-op.
by Robert Goldman 15 May '16

15 May '16

I am inclined to agree with Andreas. I don't see that CLEAN-OP is impossible for ASDF. I can see that there are some issues that require thought, and for some systems additional coding by the developer, but I don't see that as an insuperable barrier. After all, "make clean" is in some sense impossible (it's generally hand-coded by the programmer), but we use it every day. I accept Faré's points about there being challenges to write an ideal CLEAN-OP. But I don't agree that this means that we can't write a good enough CLEAN-OP. After all, make manages "make clean." Yes, it requires some effort from the programmer, but who cares? Is that a reason we have to throw up our hands and refuse to do anything? Here are some specific responses to particular issues. On the other hand, while I don't agree that these make the CLEAN-OP impossible, I *do* agree that they are difficult issues. So... I'd be happy to see CLEAN-OP added, and I'd be happy to support this effort, *BUT* CLEAN-OP patches must be preceded -- by an informal specification that describes what an implementation should do, covering these cases. Now that ASDF is on everyone's critical path, we need to think a little before changing it, and not just bash out a hunk of code. Specific responses to Faré's issues: 1. clean-op is not defined in general. I believe that this means "do we clean the system" or "do we clean the operation" [as in arnesi, whose CLEAN-OP has a FOR-OP]? This seems similar to the notion that Faré already had, of providing a BUILD-OP that does "the default build action" for a system (e.g., maybe it builds the library? Maybe it does LOAD-OP? Maybe it does LOAD-OP and DOC-OP?). So one solution would be to have an UNMAKE-OP that does the inverse of the build-op, and then have a CLEAN-OP that undoes specific operations (like the arnesi CLEAN-OP). Then the UNMAKE-OP might default to being the CLEAN-OP for COMPILE-OP, which would handle probably 90% of systems. On the other hand, I'm pretty unhappy with the notion of the BUILD-OP, because it requires retraining every single user of ASDF to use BUILD-OP instead of LOAD-OP. That would be an enormous user interface fail. So this is not a step to be taken lightly. 2. I think we can simply make clean-op clean for the current implementation. 3. I believe we should mirror the semantics of :FORCE T and :FORCE ALL when we unmake. I.e., unbuild the dependencies only with :FORCE :ALL. :FORCE T would actually be a no-op. 4. "How do you deal with defsystem-depends-on and other dependencies not explicitly included in the plan?" DEFSYSTEM-DEPENDS-ON is already broken, and will be deprecated, except as a checkable declaration (see earlier postings on this list for a description of the issues). For the rest, I'd say same as above -- if there's something that won't appear in the build plan that one needs to clean, then the programmer must write an :IN-ORDER-TO for the CLEAN-OP so that ASDF can know what it needs to do. 5. "Are you sure there aren't bugs and omissions in asdf or any extension whereby some side output file is omitted from the list?" ow does make deal with a file that isn't listed in the rule for "make clean"? You miss it. Very sorry. Fix your system definition. Use (:in-order-to (clean-op ....)) 6. "What about randomly-named temporary files created during an operation that has been interrupted?" Maybe we are doing the Wrong Thing with these. If they are temporary files, maybe it's the wrong thing to put them in the cache and rename them? Maybe they should live in /tmp (or equivalent) and be moved from there? Then it's not our problem to fix anymore -- that's for tmpwatch. If you add your own rules that make temporary files, you have to add your own rules that remove them. 7. "What if load-op is not the only operation that matters, but e.g. doc-op generates LaTeX and PDF outputs but fails to be tracked by clean-op? Are you going to use the CLOS MOP to generate a list of all possible operations? What if that other operation isn't loaded in the current image? What if operation options cause different files to be generated? Or features? What about all secondary systems? Are you going to generate a plan for them, too?" See the answer to #1: ASDF is not going to solve this problem. Either the programmer solves it using definitions of PERFORM and IN-ORDER-TO, or it's not solved. So sad. But I don't see any reason to avoid the 90% solution because there isn't a 100% solution. Best, r

3 7

Error loading SBCL contribs
by Stelian Ionescu 08 May '16

08 May '16

I think SBCL commit 25c1769e30ff7404b52a9be663626d87f8ff75bc broke the use of deferred warnings. If I compile SBCL and exec ./run-sbcl.sh, I get this error during Quicklisp initialization: ; file: /home/hechee/lisp/quicklisp/quicklisp/impl.lisp ; in: DEFINE-IMPLEMENTATION-PACKAGE :SBCL ; (REQUIRE 'QL-IMPL::SB-POSIX) ; ; caught WARNING: ; completing compilation for #<REQUIRE-SYSTEM "sb-posix"> completed without its output file #P"/home/hechee/work/src/sbcl/obj/sbcl-home/contrib/sb-posix.build-report" ; ; caught WARNING: ; completing load for #<REQUIRE-SYSTEM "sb-posix"> completed without its input file #P"/home/hechee/work/src/sbcl/obj/sbcl-home/contrib/sb-posix.build-report" ; (REQUIRE 'QL-IMPL::SB-BSD-SOCKETS) ; ; caught WARNING: ; completing compilation for #<REQUIRE-SYSTEM "sb-bsd-sockets"> completed without its output file #P"/home/hechee/work/src/sbcl/obj/sbcl-home/contrib/sb-bsd-sockets.build-report" ; ; caught WARNING: ; completing load for #<REQUIRE-SYSTEM "sb-bsd-sockets"> completed without its input file #P"/home/hechee/work/src/sbcl/obj/sbcl-home/contrib/sb-bsd-sockets.build-report" While evaluating the form starting at line 129, column 0 of #P"/home/hechee/lisp/quicklisp/setup.lisp": While evaluating the form starting at line 57, column 0 of #P"/home/hechee/.cl-init/asdf-init.lisp": debugger invoked on a UIOP/LISP-BUILD:COMPILE-FILE-ERROR in thread #<THREAD "main thread" RUNNING {1002FC6A13}>: COMPILE-FILE-ERROR while compiling #<CL-SOURCE-FILE "quicklisp" "impl"> Type HELP for debugger help, or (SB-EXT:EXIT) to exit from SBCL. restarts (invokable by number or by possibly-abbreviated name): 0: [RETRY ] Retry compiling #<CL-SOURCE-FILE "quicklisp" "impl">. 1: [ACCEPT ] Continue, treating compiling #<CL-SOURCE-FILE "quicklisp" "impl"> as having been successful. 2: Retry ASDF operation. 3: [CLEAR-CONFIGURATION-AND-RETRY] Retry ASDF operation after resetting the configuration. 4: [RETRY ] Retry EVAL of current toplevel form. 5: [CONTINUE ] Ignore error and continue loading file "/home/hechee/lisp/quicklisp/setup.lisp". 6: [ABORT ] Abort loading file "/home/hechee/lisp/quicklisp/setup.lisp". 7: Retry EVAL of current toplevel form. 8: Ignore error and continue loading file "/home/hechee/.cl-init/asdf-init.lisp". 9: Abort loading file "/home/hechee/.cl-init/asdf-init.lisp". 10: Retry EVAL of current toplevel form. 11: Ignore error and continue userinit file "/home/hechee/.sbclrc". 12: Abort userinit file "/home/hechee/.sbclrc". 13: Skip to toplevel READ/EVAL/PRINT loop. 14: [EXIT ] Exit SBCL (calling #'EXIT, killing the process). (UIOP/LISP-BUILD:CHECK-LISP-COMPILE-RESULTS NIL T T "~/asdf-action::format-action/" ((#<ASDF/LISP-ACTION:COMPILE-OP > . #<ASDF/LISP-ACTION:CL-SOURCE-FILE "quicklisp" "impl">))) source: (ERROR 'COMPILE-FILE-ERROR :CONTEXT-FORMAT CONTEXT-FORMAT :CONTEXT-ARGUMENTS CONTEXT-ARGUMENTS) There's no obj/sbcl-home/contrib/sb-posix.build-report, or any build -report file, just several test-passed.test-report under obj/asdf -cache/ Funny though that I don't get this error if I exec sbcl through an absolute path, e.g. ~/work/src/sbcl/run-sbcl.sh, it's only when I call it from the source directory as ./run-sbcl.sh -- Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

1 0

How to fix arnesi:clean-op.
by TANIGUCHI Masaya 08 May '16

08 May '16

I want to do "make clean" on ASDF. I tried to use clean-op of ARNESI. I got a following message, WARNING: No dependency propagating scheme specified for operation class IT.BESE.ARNESI:CLEAN-OP. The class needs to be updated for ASDF 3.1 and specify appropriate propagation mixins. #<IT.BESE.ARNESI:CLEAN-OP > #<ASDF/PLAN:SEQUENTIAL-PLAN {1003A65533}> Definition of arnesi:clean-op is (defclass clean-op (asdf:operation) ((for-op :accessor for-op :initarg :for-op :initform 'asdf:compile-op)) (:documentation "Removes any files generated by an asdf component.")) (defmethod asdf:perform ((op clean-op) (c asdf:component)) "Delete all the output files generated by the component C." (dolist (f (asdf:output-files (make-instance (for-op op)) c)) (when (probe-file f) (delete-file f)))) (defmethod asdf:operation-done-p ((op clean-op) (c asdf:component)) "Returns T when the output-files of (for-op OP) C don't exist." (dolist (f (asdf:output-files (make-instance (for-op op)) c)) (when (probe-file f) (return-from asdf:operation-done-p nil))) t) How to fix it? Thanks. ta2gch

6 8

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

ASDF status for 3.1.7 release
by Robert Goldman 30 Mar '16

30 Mar '16

I think we are ready for a release technically speaking. Tests pass on Mac and Linux. Tests do not uniformly pass on Windows, but all the failing tests I see are due to cygwin pathnames creeping into ASDF. As I have said before, this is a problem with Windows support by ASDF, but *it is not a new problem*. So I will prepare 3.1.7 for release later this week. Tomorrow if I can manage it. Going forward, we really need a Windows partner for ASDF. Cheers, r

6 9

Simple (?) Windows question
by Robert Goldman 25 Mar '16

25 Mar '16

Is there some way that a CL implementation can know whether it is running under a Unix-alike like Cygwin or MinGW? If we use RUN-PROGRAM to interrogate the environment, we do so using CMD.exe, so I'm not sure how CMD.EXE would know if it was being run as the grandchild of a bash process. AFAICT Cygwin (and I don't know about MinGW) don't put anything into their environments that I can obviously see. E.g., if I start a lisp inside cygwin and do (GETENV "OS") I just see "Windows_NT". Thanks, r

5 7

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

asdf-devel