"Fare" == Far <Far> writes:
Fare> My package surgery looks like it works, but it looks like CMUCL refuses Fare> to invalidate old CLOS methods when I fmakunbound an object, and/or Fare> refuses to invalidate them in some caches. Therefore, the old methods Fare> keep getting called and the upgrade fails in weird ways. Fare> Trying to unintern the symbols for individual offending functions Fare> doesn't work either; I don't remember the symptoms. What is the recipe for a hot-upgrade? Fare> If you're interested in fixing this kind of issues, I can try to come up Fare> with reduced examples. I'm interested, but I hate looking at pcl. :-( Fare> Anyway, please test the latest ASDF with CMUCL, Fare> I think it's ripe for release, except for those upgrade woes. Fare> I'd like your feedback considering the massive amount of hacking Fare> that happened. I ran the testsuite again. All 43 tests pass. There are 3 notes compiling asdf, one of which can probably by fixed by not assigning to ensure-directory in resolve-location. (Based on the compiler note; I didn't look to see if this is a real issue or not.) I get a message from file3-only about one sequence being a different length from another. There are more messages there about two things yielding the same path. ASDF-ENCODINGS test was skipped. asdf.texinfo has a couple of warnings about a misplaced { and } on line 269. So, on whole, it seems asdf is working fine. Ray