[asdf-devel] never ending component relative pathnames

[james anderson]

i would be as well.

that's why i sent it to you at the other end of a link.

in any case, whatever direction the component location computations  
follow, they need somehow to take into account the variations in  
pathname construction which ccl/sbcl evidence.

On 2010-03-05, at 20:14 , Robert Goldman wrote:

> On 3/5/10 Mar 5 -12:06 PM, james anderson wrote:
>> good evening;
>>
>> on the occasion of pushing de.setf.graphics down the wire, when i
>> built it for ccl/sbcl i did an obligatory pull on asdf and observe
>> that something changed in the treatment of modules' component
>> relative pathnames. with the effect that it was no longer possible
>> possible to build clx. the clx-0-7-4 version as (:relative)
>> specification in module pathnames which ran afoul of the asdf
>> changes. i applied the same tactic as i have previously found
>> effective for source file components and was able to build. the diff
>> [1] is posted with the graphics sources.
>>
>> on other semi-related matters, i can report, that i have now an s3
>> ami (linux-2.6.31+ubuntu++^3) with which i can boot an ec2 instance
>> with all pieces in place to run the target lisp implementations.
>>
>>
>> ---
>>   [1] : http://github.com/lisp/de.setf.graphics/blob/master/readmes/
>> asdf.diff
>
> I reviewed this modification and I'm not sure I understand the
> implications.  This seems to squash Fare's
> component-name-to-pathname-components call, and I don't know what
> implications that has for his newfangled component names like (:file
> "foo/bar"). [As an aside, do we have tests for these?  I see them only
> in test-module-pathnames and only in one location...]
>
> I'm reluctant to apply this patch without more understanding of its  
> effects.
>
> Best,
> r