2009/8/5 Greg Bennett gwbennett@sentex.ca:

As far as I can see, :pathname in asdf plays the role of :source-pathname. In  looking for examples, I found the following in the mcclim.asd file: .. ((:module "Tests"        :pathname #.(make-pathname :directory '(:relative "Drei" "Tests"))   :components .. And indeed there is a subdirectory Tests of the directory Drei which is in the right place relative to the opening directory of the .asd file for :relative to make sense. Q1: Is it possible/permitted to say things like:  '(:relative "One" "Two" "Three")  to have asdf look two subdirectories down the tree ?

Yes. :FILE components default to directory .asd is in. Subcomponents of :MODULE components default to the directory named by the module. :PATHNAME can be used to alter these -- note how above the pathname is constructed using #.(MAKE-PATHNAME ...). Unless you are _very_ concerned about portability, using #P syntax should works too. (I'm not sure which implementations pathname parsing McCLIM is guarding against, but I assume that is why they don't use #P.)

(:file "foo" :pathname #p"extensions/hax/foo.lisp")

(:module "quux" :pathname #p"old/2008/09/QUUX/" :components ((:file "quux1") (:file "quux2)))

etc are all all legal and expected to work.

I have been unable to find examples of the use of :output-files in asdf. This option seems to provide the role of :binary-pathname in mk-defsystem. Currently, all tour project's binary files are stored in their own tree with its own root but with the structure of the source tree maintained.

There is no :OUTPUT-FILES option: instead the generic function OUTPUT-FILES is called to determine where to put things.

For example - untested - this should put fasls under build/ directory in the same place where the .asd file is, with same subdirectory structure as the sources have:

(defpackage :x-system (:use :cl :asdf))

(in-package :x-system)

(defclass x-file (cl-source-file) ())

(defmethod output-files ((op compile-op) (com x-file)) (let* ((system (component-system com)) (source-root (pathname-directory (system-source-directory system))) (pathname (component-pathname com)) ;; Splice in "build" beneath the source root. (fasl-dir (append source-root (list "build") (subseq (pathname-directory pathname) (length source-root))))) (list (make-pathname :directory fasl-dir :defaults (compile-file-pathname pathname)))))

(defsystem :x :components ((:x-file "foo") (:module "bar :components ((:x-file "quux)))))

That is, given

x.asd foo.lisp bar/quux.lisp

the expected result is

x.asd foo.lisp bar/quux.lisp build/foo.lisp build/bar/quux.lisp

Q2: Does the syntax of :output-files permit this sort of thing ?     I would seem to need a statement of the form     #.(make-pathname :directory '(:absolute "Whatever"))     since this is a separately rooted tree. Unless I find a positive answer to Q1, in which     case, presumably the syntax of :output-files will be similar and I can locate the driving     .asd file high enough up in the whole project for everything to be relative.

As said, there is no :OUTPUT-FILES -- but you can put things in a separately rooted tree if you wish. I assume that this is some sort of internal application, or distributed as binary -- in which case a separate tree is a non-issue.

ASDF's default assumption is that it is being used with library code is being distributed to users (or other developers) as source, which is why putting things in a separately rooted trees is generally frowned upon. But as said, if you're not distributing the code as source this is a non-issue.

You may also wish to look at

http://common-lisp.net/project/asdf-binary-locations/

From the code (above) I cut from mcclim.asd it seems that mixed case pathnames are allowed. Q3: Have I misunderstood the on-line manual here ? In discussing components it seems     insistent on lower case, which I had assumed asdf would 'demand' everywhere.

Yes, mixed case _strings_ as component names are expected to work, as are mixed case pathnames -- barring near-extinct operating systems.

Cheers,

-- Nikodemus