asdf-devel

asdf-devel@common-lisp.net

2 participants
1378 discussions

[Asdf-devel] :AROUND methods
by Robert P. Goldman 07 Jun '14

07 Jun '14

Trying to identify what's breaking my system in the syntax-case branch, I found a bunch of around methods in ASDF. IIRC once upon a time we had removed all the :AROUND methods on exported generic functions, on the grounds that they could unpredictably interact with programmers' extensions. I think we experimented with using a bespoke method combination method to allow ourselves to have our own around methods and "arounder" methods for programmers. Even more vaguely, I think I remember that the method-combination extension didn't work reliably on all implementations, so it was stripped out. But I thought when that happened, we tried to excise the use of method combination in ASDF. Am I hallucinating this? I'd be grateful to anyone whose memory of this stuff is better. thanks, r

2 5

[Asdf-devel] New draft of design document pushed
by Robert P. Goldman 03 Jun '14

03 Jun '14

It's still at an interim state, but I think it's getting to the point where it will be generally useful. I did a bunch of minor reformatting, and took a several of your responses and translated them into the main thread, removing the back-and-forth: I don't think the discussion is as valuable as a clear statement of the design. I have a big, sloppy mess of a system involving at least one additional readtable, that breaks under the syntax-control branch. That's going to be my test case for forcing myself to understand this. Best, r

2 2

[Asdf-devel] Merged master into syntax-control
by Robert P. Goldman 01 Jun '14

01 Jun '14

To ease understanding of changes, I've merged master into syntax-control, and pushed the result. Please LMK if there are any issues with this. The resulting branch passes all the regression tests (haven't tested updates). cheers, r

1 0

Re: [Asdf-devel] Wanted: Debian packager
by Faré 25 May '14

25 May '14

Here's the patch I've committed on my local release branch, but haven't pushed to common-lisp.net yet, pending maintainer approval. Note that 1- the email listed at the end of the top entry of the changelog has to be the same as the person who's going to sign the package with his PGP key as registered on mentors.debian.net, before the package is uploaded. So if someone else is going to upload this or future packages, the address should be amended (and also added in the debian/control file). 2- lintian ../cl-asdf*.changes is your friend. 3- To create the package I'm using the version of the release script that's in master, 4- A good exercise in further bootstrapping ASDF would be convert bin/asdf-builder to a trivial cl-launch script + a system asdf-build (or meta-asdf? whatever), and the Makefile to a trivial wrapper that invokes it (except for the initial bootstrap of the concatenated build/asdf.lisp), and the Makefile targets into as many secondary systems of asdf-build. I'm refraining from doing more of it, since I'm moving to new projects. —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org A single flaw in someone else's beliefs, they are discredited. Repeated obvious flaws in your own, you keep the blind faith. Government saves! On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Kambiz Darabi <darabi(a)m-creations.com> wrote: > Hello, > > On 2014-05-16 07:12 CEST, Faré <fahree(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> That said, I can do the asdf debian package one last time for 3.1.2. >> I've experimented a bit and come up with a better recipe. Apparently >> the trick to avoid dealing with complications is to work in a branch >> where the only changes since the upstream release tag are in the >> debian/ directory. If you let me do it, I'll do it in the release >> branch. I updated the bin/asdf-builder script to do the release >> (moving code from the Makefile and making it better — scripting is SO >> much better in Lisp). Of course, the script as exists in the release >> branch is insufficient, and since it does a git clean -xfd we need to >> extract it from master under another name everytime. >> So: I committed some debian-only changes in my release branch (not >> pushed — but I can do it if you approve, and even upload), and ran: >> git show master:bin/asdf-builder > bin/x && chmod a+x bin/x && >> ./bin/x debian-package >> and it looks like it worked. I can push all that if you want, or show >> you how to do it. It's a matter of >> git checkout release ; git show master:debian/changelog > >> debian/changelog ; edit debian/changelog > > I have never packaged for Debian, but I use it since rex (1996). With a > bit of hand-holding, I might be able to do the packaging work. > > Where can I fetch your changes? > > > Kambiz Darabi

4 7

Re: [Asdf-devel] Wanted: Debian packager
by Kambiz Darabi 16 May '14

16 May '14

Cross-posted to asdf-devel before subscribing: -------------------- Start of forwarded message -------------------- From: Kambiz Darabi <darabi(a)m-creations.com> To: Faré <fahree(a)gmail.com> Cc: Robert Goldman <rpgoldman(a)sift.info>, Debian Common Lisp Team <pkg-common-lisp-devel(a)lists.alioth.debian.org>, ASDF-devel <asdf-devel(a)common-lisp.net> Subject: Re: [Asdf-devel] Wanted: Debian packager Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 08:57:10 +0200 Hello, On 2014-05-16 07:12 CEST, Faré <fahree(a)gmail.com> wrote: > That said, I can do the asdf debian package one last time for 3.1.2. > I've experimented a bit and come up with a better recipe. Apparently > the trick to avoid dealing with complications is to work in a branch > where the only changes since the upstream release tag are in the > debian/ directory. If you let me do it, I'll do it in the release > branch. I updated the bin/asdf-builder script to do the release > (moving code from the Makefile and making it better — scripting is SO > much better in Lisp). Of course, the script as exists in the release > branch is insufficient, and since it does a git clean -xfd we need to > extract it from master under another name everytime. > So: I committed some debian-only changes in my release branch (not > pushed — but I can do it if you approve, and even upload), and ran: > git show master:bin/asdf-builder > bin/x && chmod a+x bin/x && > ./bin/x debian-package > and it looks like it worked. I can push all that if you want, or show > you how to do it. It's a matter of > git checkout release ; git show master:debian/changelog > > debian/changelog ; edit debian/changelog I have never packaged for Debian, but I use it since rex (1996). With a bit of hand-holding, I might be able to do the packaging work. Where can I fetch your changes? Kambiz Darabi -------------------- End of forwarded message --------------------

1 0

[Asdf-devel] Wanted: Debian packager
by Robert P. Goldman 15 May '14

15 May '14

For previous versions of ASDF, Faré has been providing a debian package, cl-asdf. I'd like a volunteer to take over the packaging process. The more I mess with this, the less I feel like I know what I'm doing. I haven't *maintained* (as opposed to used) a Linux box for about 5 years, and when I did, I used an RPM-based distro, instead of a .deb-based one. For that matter, this is not dogfood that I plan on consuming. So..... 1. Is anyone else willing to take over the packaging? This should be relatively minimal amount of work, really just running the build scripts, uploading the packages, and yelling at me when the Changelog is badly formatted, etc. 2. If the answer to #1 is "no," how bad is that, anyway? Does anyone actually use ASDF from cl-asdf instead of getting it bundled from their implementation or installing from source? Maybe this package could simply go away? Cheers, r

2 3

[Asdf-devel] Closing in on the release
by Robert P. Goldman 07 May '14

07 May '14

I have just made a few further tweaks to the manual, merged the "docs" branch, and pushed it to common-lisp.net I'm retesting, but I believe that this is going to be 3.1 this weekend. Speak now or forever wish you had ;-) R

2 3

[Asdf-devel] ASDF 3.1.2 released
by Robert P. Goldman 06 May '14

06 May '14

The release version of ASDF 3.1, version 3.1.2, has finally arrived. It is loaded with bug-fixes, more portability (substantially better support on Windows; several new lisp implementations), better documentation (extensive revisions to the Texinfo manual), and new convenience features such as PACKAGE-INFERRED-SYSTEMs. We urge the maintainers of lisp implementations to move to version 3.1.2 directly, as it is clearly superior to its predecessors. This is especially true if you are currently bundling a pre-release version of ASDF. For a list of changes, see the attached changelog. Special thanks to Dave Cooper and Anton Vodonosov (alphabetically) for testing support. Thanks to all those who have participated in the discussions on ASDF-devel for bug fixes, suggestions, and course corrections. Thanks to Pete Keller for proofreading this announcement; any remaining errors are mine alone. Although he is no longer the lead maintainer, François-René Rideau (Fare), has continued to expend vast amounts of effort on ASDF, and provided invaluable guidance to the code submitted by the rest of us. The latest version of ASDF is available at the project website: http://common-lisp.net/project/asdf/ Robert P. Goldman ASDF maintainer-in-chief

1 0

[Asdf-devel] Test results
by Robert Goldman 04 May '14

04 May '14

On Linux all the tests passed. On Mac, though, test-all-no-stop crashed: /bin/sh: command substitution: line 0: syntax error near unexpected token `newline' /bin/sh: command substitution: line 0: `for i in build/results/*-upgrade.text ; do case "$(tail -1 < $i)" in "Upgrade test succeeded for "*' Unexpected upgrade failures on these implementations: ;; *) echo ; esac ; done) make[2]: *** [check-all-upgrade-results] Error 1 This looks like a bug in the Makefile to me. I'm off for a while now; hope to look into this later. Cheers, r -- Robert P. Goldman Staff Scientist Smart Information Flow Technologies (d/b/a SIFT, LLC) 319 1st Ave N., Suite 400 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Voice: (612) 326-3934 Email: rpgoldman(a)SIFT.net

3 2

[Asdf-devel] package-system
by Faré 30 Apr '14

30 Apr '14

Dear Lisp hackers, apparently, Xach thinks the name "package-system" is a bad name for the quick-build compatible extension to ASDF that I implemented and is going to be released with ASDF 3.1 — see file package-system.lisp, its use in lisp-interface-library, and the description in the ASDF manual (doc/asdf.texinfo in the master branch). Basic idea: each file starts with a defpackage or define-package, the packages it use's or import-from's or shadowing-import-from's are detected, each package is mapped back to a system, that itself may be mapped to files under a package-system. Before the release is the best time for renaming things. If you have a suggestion for a better name, now is the time to speak, not later. * package-system * quick-build * system-whose-dependencies-are-deduced-from-defined-package-and-whose-pathname-is-deduced-from-its-name * one-package-one-file-one-system * not-quite-faslpath * gangnam-style I suppose the constraints are that it should not be too long, yet somewhat descriptive and not too confusing. Failing that, a brand name. —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Where did the water from the Deluge come from, and where did it go?

10 30

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

asdf-devel