[asdf-devel] Re: asdf/bundle and ECL prologue / epilogue

[Dave Cooper]

Do you plan to change the name of monolithic-fasl-op ?


On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Faré <fahree at gmail.com> wrote:

> Speaking of asdf-bundle and ECL...
>
> In ASDF 3.1, I renamed the misnomer binary-op to deliver-asd-op;
> is there any user in the ECL world who cares about that old name from
> asdf-ecl?
> I could add a backward-compatible shim.
>
> While I'm at renaming misnomers, I'd like to rename fasl-op to
> compile-bundle-op and load-fasl-op to load-bundle-op. I expect these
> classes to be used, though, and do intend to have backward-compatible
> classes available — even though nothing shows in either the ECL
> sources or Quicklisp.
>
> [I need to confirm these renamings with the current ASDF maintainer,
> though].
>
> —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics•
> http://fare.tunes.org
> Yield to temptation; it may never pass your way again.
>         — Robert Heinlein, "Time Enough For Love"
>
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Faré <fahree at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Regarding ASDF and ECL, it seemed to me that *load-system-operation*
> > had been designed
> > so I could/should do this in asdf/bundle:
> >  (unless (use-ecl-byte-compiler-p)
> >     (setf *load-system-operation* 'load-fasl-op))
> >
> > Unhappily, when I did, I got 4 errors while testing. I found 1 bug in
> > ASDF, 2 bugs in test scripts that didn't expect load-fasl-op (good for
> > ECL to find them! all of them fixed), and what looks like one bug in
> > ECL.
> >
> > If you uncomment the lines mentioned above in bundle.lisp,
> > modify this test so it uses load-fasl-op instead of load-op,
> > have it (trace c::builder load* perform-plan perform) if you want, and
> run it:
> > make t l=ecl t='test-xach-update-bug.script'
> >
> > The .fasb is loaded, but fails to define the second-version package.
> > If you load it into another fresh image, it works.
> >
> > Therefore, after adding two lines, I commented them out again.
> >
> > Or is it per design that if you load a fasb, then another incompatible
> > version of a same-named, same location, fasb in the very same image,
> > the results are undefined? But it looks like it's working for a
> > regular fas, since the test works using load-op.
> >
> > In any case, if some ECL maintainer has spare cycles, this deserves to
> > be investigated eventually.
> >
> > I'm running ECL 13.5.1 (git:e7daee08e8cb7d4b4cea4bc27ce9c7839e236938)
> > on Linux amd64. It's the last version that doesn't bug out with
> > program-op because of the bug
> >
> > If you tell me I should use load-fasl-op anyway, I will.
> >
> > PS: Anton, if you have time, can you re-run tests after uncommenting
> > the mentioned lines in bundle.lisp? I'm interested in whether there
> > are regressions using ECL this way... it did error out on missing
> > dependencies in a few of ASDF's tests (including in asdf-encodings).
> > Otherwise, I think we have a release candidate with 3.1.0.92.
> >
> > —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics•
> http://fare.tunes.org
> > There are two kinds of pacifists: those who try to disarm the criminals,
> and
> > those who try to disarm the victims.
>
>


-- 
My Best,

Dave Cooper, Genworks Support
david.cooper at genworks.com, dave.genworks.com(skype)
USA: 248-327-3253(o), 1-248-330-2979(mobile)
UK: 0191 645 1699
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/asdf-devel/attachments/20140320/ce08718c/attachment.html>