[asdf-devel] Mac OSX test upgrade status

Faré fahree at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 20:52:50 UTC 2013

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> wrote:
> I got through almost all the upgrade tests before failing with
> allegromodern trying to upgrade from 1.85:
> ; registering #<system :asdf @ #x1000afe932> as asdf
> ; Fast loading /Users/rpg/lisp/asdf/build/asdf.fasl
> TEST ABORTED: Attempt to fast load a non-fasl file:
> #P"/Users/rpg/lisp/asdf/build/asdf.fasl"
> Script failed
> upgrade FAILED for allegromodern from 1.85 using method
> 'load-asdf-lisp'load-asdf-system
> I can see why this fails!
> When I look at ~/lisp/asdf/build/asdf.fasl in emacs I see this:
> #!/usr/local/bin/sbcl --script
> # FASL
>   compiled from "/Users/rpg/lisp/asdf/build/asdf.lisp"
>   using SBCL version
> which suggests to me that we may be leaking something from one test to
> another...
Oh, I see.

Usually, we do not create a build/asdf.fasl,
because the output-translations layer moves it away.

However, when testing antique version 1.85, we do create that file.
And then, we have the clash between asdf.fasl from sbcl
and asdf.fasl from allegro, just like we used to have in the bad old times
— precisely because we're testing an upgrade from the bad old times.

To counter that, the first upgrade target is load-asdf-lisp-clean,
but in this case, it wasn't cleaning enough.

I've pushed a fix to the repository, and my manual testing
suggests the tests are working after in a way that they weren't before:
	make u l=sbcl ASDF_UPGRADE_TEST_TAGS=1.85
	make u l=allegro ASDF_UPGRADE_TEST_TAGS=1.85

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
Any sufficiently advanced misquotation is indistinguishable
from an original statement. — John McCarthy, misquoted

More information about the asdf-devel mailing list