[asdf-devel] never ending component relative pathnames

[Robert Goldman]

On 3/5/10 Mar 5 -2:18 PM, james anderson wrote:
> i would be as well.
> 
> that's why i sent it to you at the other end of a link.

I followed the link to the diff.  What more should I have seen?

Also, it would be helpful if you would describe precisely the breakage
you have observed (what precisely happened to the module pathnames?).

In that case, we can abstract a simpler version and turn it into a test
case.  We can't reverse engineer such a test case out of the description
below, and it's probably expecting too much for us to pull your git repo
and try to build it just in order to extract a bug.

Would it be possible for you to reformulate this as a launchpad bug?

I'm afraid I'm very busy with paying work now, and won't be able to do
much more than push a very clear patch for the next week or so.  Maybe
someone else has more time.

Best,
R



> 
> 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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> asdf-devel mailing list
> asdf-devel at common-lisp.net
> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel