[asdf-devel] 3.0.2.21

[Faré]

This weekend, thanks to Dave Cooper, there was much bug fixing on
windows, particularly (but not only) related to run-program (and,
unhappily, also unearthing implementation bugs in at least in Allegro
and SBCL). PJB also found a bug in with-temporary-file, that was
fixed. Because I was remote-debugging and failed to think about
sharing a topic branch, this led to many increments in patch number.
The test system was made more robust as a result.

I also found a bug in test-module-pathnames (failure to specify
*test-directory* to merge-pathnames*) that may or may not explain the
test failures that Robert was seeing on LispWorks/Mac, and Dave on
sbcl/win -- Robert, does your pathname under LispWorks have a non-nil
host and/or device? That would explain it.

SBCL/win also has massive failures in asdf-pathname-test, which I
don't fully understand (I don't understand this janderson-contributed
test in general), but every other file write test is a failure.

Robert: can I commit this asdf-package-system branch now, before the
3.0.3 release? It's only additive features, modulo a rename of file
asdf/defsystem to asdf/parse-defsystem (with a nickname for the old
package name) and system asdf/header to asdf/prelude. Maintaining that
topic branch is slightly costly, I've been using it for a week and
removed a lot of kinks and relative inefficiencies. The new features
are the support for the package-system "one package per file" style of
quick-build, and some useful :use-reexport and :mix-reexport options
of uiop:define-package. I believe it's not affecting anything
negatively and is robust, and I'd really like to be able to encourage
people to "just use it" without waiting for a few more months until
the next release. [I'm using it for lisp-interface-library, but it's
more awkward if people have to use the asdf extension
asdf-package-system.]

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
Panties: not best thing on earth, but next to it.