On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Jeff Cunningham
 
> I would gladly rename it. It would work just as well for its original
> purpose, since as long as you create a uffi.asd symlink,
> (asdf:find-system :uffi) will pick it up. However, I suspect there
> might be other code in clbuild that does in fact use cffi-uffi-compat
> and I wouldn't want to break it. Can anyone confirm if there is such a
> dependency?
 
Apparently, it used to be named uffi-compat.asd. Why couldn’t it be named that? That would fix everything. 
And so far as I know, the breadth vs depth argument doesn’t hold, because in most installations you want _all_ the your asd files to end up symlinked in your systems directory (and I know there are other ways to do it, but that’s the way most of us do it – why make life hard on us?). No matter what technique you use, it will be first one wins the prize which isn’t necessarily going to be what you want (or last one if you use –f with the symlink command). I think that’s why the custom of naming them “uffi-cffi-compat.asd” evolved in the first place, wasn’t it? So it was completely clear in a linear collection of asd files?
 

--Jeff