Hello,
Is there a reason that asdf-install is "not as recommendable" ? I think cl-build maps well to a lot of projects but so does asdf-install for a lot of others (particularly those with stable releases like cffi). A lot of people would like to avoid having to get everything from darcs/git/svn/cvs including me.
The latest cffi release does not install cleanly with asdf-install as Stefil is not on cliki and can not be installed. Can this get fixed ?
Regards, Chris
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 11:29 PM, Xristos Kalkanis ccalca@essex.ac.uk wrote:
Is there a reason that asdf-install is "not as recommendable"?
[...]
The latest cffi release does not install cleanly with asdf-install
I guess that's why I wouldn't recommend it. It pulls way too many dependencies, tries to compile every system in advance, most developers don't use it themselves, etc. I agree that a repository/system stable release is useful but I don't think asdf-install is an adequate solution.
In any case, by the time asdf-install fails, it has already downloaded all of the dependencies required by CFFI, so it's somewhat usable.
as Stefil is not on cliki and can not be installed. Can this get fixed ?
I did add it to cliki at one point, but it depends on Swank. I'm not sure how to add the latter to cliki. If you have a solution, please go ahead and fix it.
Luís Oliveira <luismbo <at> gmail.com> writes:
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 11:29 PM, Xristos Kalkanis <ccalca <at> essex.ac.uk>
wrote:
Is there a reason that asdf-install is "not as recommendable"?
[...]
The latest cffi release does not install cleanly with asdf-install
I guess that's why I wouldn't recommend it. It pulls way too many dependencies, tries to compile every system in advance, most developers don't use it themselves, etc. I agree that a repository/system stable release is useful but I don't think asdf-install is an adequate solution.
In any case, by the time asdf-install fails, it has already downloaded all of the dependencies required by CFFI, so it's somewhat usable.
My 2c is that if CFFI is no longer ASDF-INSTALLable then the previous version of CFFI should really be linked from the CLiki. This is the version that ASDF- INSTALL will use. Otherwise the installation of any package that depends on ASDF-INSTALL and CFFI is automatically broken.
- Luke
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Luke Crook luke@balooga.com wrote:
My 2c is that if CFFI is no longer ASDF-INSTALLable then the previous version of CFFI should really be linked from the CLiki. This is the version that ASDF- INSTALL will use. Otherwise the installation of any package that depends on ASDF-INSTALL and CFFI is automatically broken.
Hmm, that sounds like a recipe for trouble. Anyway, I packaged Slime up and made it asdf-installable; hopefully that wasn't a terrible idea. This should make CFFI asdf-installable again. Please confirm.
Luís Oliveira <luismbo <at> gmail.com> writes:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Luke Crook <luke <at> balooga.com> wrote:
My 2c is that if CFFI is no longer ASDF-INSTALLable then the previous
version
of CFFI should really be linked from the CLiki. This is the version that
ASDF-
INSTALL will use. Otherwise the installation of any package that depends on ASDF-INSTALL and CFFI is automatically broken.
Hmm, that sounds like a recipe for trouble. Anyway, I packaged Slime up and made it asdf-installable; hopefully that wasn't a terrible idea. This should make CFFI asdf-installable again. Please confirm.
Now that I finally have my Linux box up and running, yes I can confirm that CFFI is asdf-installable once again.
Thank you. - Luke
-
Luke Crook -
Luís Oliveira -
Xristos Kalkanis