[xcvb-devel] CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY question

[Peter Keller]

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 06:19:29PM -0400, Faré wrote:
> Dear Peter,
> 
> >> What should XCVB do in these cases of how CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY is set:
> >>
> >> CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY=
> >> CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY=. ;; or some other relative path
> >> CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY=/absolute/but/nonexistent/path
> >> CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY=/a/good/path
> >
> Are you trying to determine what XCVB is actually doing, or what it
> "should" be doing?

I've determined what it atually does. I'm trying to figure out what it
"should" be doing. :)

> Note that XCVB delegates most of the handling of CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY to
> ASDF, so that the two should produce consistent results.

yeah, I noticed that. Question: Is XCVB always going to be dependent upon
code in ASDF, or should the code from ASDF be lifted wholesale into XCVB
and the dependency between them broken?

> > CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY=. ;; or some other relative path
> >        Fail with an error that it should be an absolute path.
> >
> Currently, it fails indeed for want of an absolute path.

Is this XCVB's responsibity to check? Or ASDFs?

> > CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY=/a/good/path
> >        Works properly, systems found.
> >
> Yes. Though you probably want // at the end to recurse through subdirectories.

Oh, I hadn't realized that. Thanks!

-pete