hello;
i recall, that we have started down this path before, but we never got very far, so i would like to pick up the thread again:
what exactly fails (or is just inconsistent) in the respective logical pathname implementations to preclude accomplishing the same thing with logical pathnames? whatever that may be, why is it better to re-implement the functionality for asdf rather than to fix the problem?
On 2009-09-09, at 14:39 , Robert Goldman wrote:
Gary King wrote:
(cc'd to list)
Damn. The function disappeared recently (by my hand). I didn't realize (obviously) that it was used. I'll fix.
Gary,
Maybe this would be a good time to push A-B-L into the ASDF repository? I've always been in favor of this, acnyway, since it's such a critical extension. IMO it would be great if anyone who had ASDF could also get A-B-L with no more work than a call to asdf:oos.
Best, r
On Sep 8, 2009, at 11:17 PM, Robert Goldman wrote:
I just updated, and now can't start up lisp because asdf-binary-locations calls ASDF::RESOLVE-SYMLINKS which seems to have vanished from asdf.lisp.
Any insight?
r
-- Gary Warren King, metabang.com Cell: (413) 559 8738 Fax: (206) 338-4052 gwkkwg on Skype * garethsan on AIM * gwking on twitter
asdf-devel mailing list asdf-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel