[asdf-devel] [Sbcl-devel] Logical pathnames vs ASDF & SBCL

Zach Beane xach at xach.com
Fri Jun 17 11:19:04 UTC 2011

"Scott L. Burson" <Scott at sympoiesis.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Faré <fahree at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't see why you believe that ASDF 1.x isn't a viable option.
> I'm not among those having trouble with ASDF v2, but I would just
> point out that going back to v1 has been made rather unattractive by
> the tremendous usefulness of Quicklisp, which AFAIK depends on v2.

No, it doesn't.

When I started sharing Quicklisp, some implementations didn't ship ASDF
at all, so it made sense to bundle a copy and load it if
necessary. ASDF2 seemed like the reasonable thing to bundle.

The feature of ASDF2 that makes Quicklisp work better is implementation
FASL segregation enabled by default.


More information about the asdf-devel mailing list