Recent disappearance of asdf:bundle-system.

[Faré]

1- While the trivial convenience function bundle-system was removed,
the underlying functionality still exists. The function was ill-named
legacy of dubious value. Do ABCL users actually use this function as
such?

2- On the other hand, its removal is a bit brutal. It might have been
better to use the gradual removal strategy we were thinking of in
branch obsolete-function-warnings. Maybe there's a case for reversing
this removal before next release, and instead completing and merging
that branch and using it. I however do not volunteer for the job at
this point.

3- I merged part of this pull request into 3.1.7.13.

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
What is mind? No matter! What is matter? Never mind!
       — Bertrand Russell's Grand Mother, In Karl Popper, The Unended Quest


On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Jean-Claude Beaudoin
<jean.claude.beaudoin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Daniel Kochmański <daniel at turtleware.eu>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hey,
>>
>> now all MKCL tests pass as expected. I've also disabled load-bundle-op
>> as a default option (seems like a MKCL bug):
>>
>> https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/merge_requests/11
>
>
> I'll have to look deeper into that load-bundle-op question...
>
>>
>>
>> The issue with the system modules is caused by a muss in the systems
>> definitions of MKCL. Namely asd files are bogus – for instance there is
>> (repeated) cmp.asd definition in contrib/ directory pointing and cmp.a
>> file, but the latter isn't present there. `locate-system' takes the
>> cmp.asd from the contrib/ directory and can't inject proper module. I've
>> disabled for mkcl find-system check, but mkcl will fail, if any asd
>> system has "cmp" in `:depends-on' (and this is not a regression, it was
>> like this before and is a problem with mkcl asd files).
>>
>
> Yep, that's a bug.  I had not noticed that bogus cmp.asd before now, that's
> bad.
>
>>
>> Long story short – everything is as fine as was before this "wave of
>> change".
>>
>
> Thanks, I'll give the test suite one more spin as soon as I get an
> opportunity,
> just to confirm.
>
>