On 1/25/11 Jan 25 -1:40 PM, Pascal Costanza wrote:
>
> On 25 Jan 2011, at 18:57, Robert Goldman wrote:
>
>> On 1/25/11 Jan 25 -7:30 AM, Pascal Costanza wrote:
>>>
>>> On 23 Jan 2011, at 15:27, Pascal Costanza wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I have encountered two more issues when trying to use ASDF 2 with logical
>>>> pathnames in Allegro and clisp. I have the following logical pathname
>>>> translations in Allegro and clisp respectively:
>>>>
>>>> #+allegro
>>>> (setf (logical-pathname-translations "costanza")
>>>> `(("**;*.fasl.*" ,(format nil "/Users/costanza/.cache/common-lisp/~A
>>>> ~A/**/*.fasl"
>>>> (lisp-implementation-type)
>>>> (read-from-string
>>>> (lisp-implementation-version))))
>>>> ("**;*.*.*" "/Users/costanza/**/*.*")))
>>>>
>>>> #+clisp
>>>> (progn
>>>> (setq custom:*parse-namestring-ansi* t)
>>>>
>>>> (setf (logical-pathname-translations "costanza")
>>>> `(("**;*.lib.*" ,(format nil "/Users/costanza/.cache/common-lisp/~A
>>>> ~A/**/*.lib"
>>>> (lisp-implementation-type)
>>>> (read-from-string
>>>> (lisp-implementation-version))))
>>>> ("**;*.fas.*" ,(format nil "/Users/costanza/.cache/common-lisp/~A
>>>> ~A/**/*.fas"
>>>> (lisp-implementation-type)
>>>> (read-from-string
>>>> (lisp-implementation-version))))
>>>> ("**;*.*.*" "/Users/costanza/**/*.*"))))
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When compiling systems with ASDF, however, the fasl, lib and fas files
>>>> don't end up in the folders designated by these logical pathname
>>>> translations, but rather in the locations as specified with ASDF output
>>>> translations. (In CMUCL, Clozure, ECL, LispWorks, RMCL, and SBCL, similar
>>>> logical pathname translations work as expected.)
>>>
>>> I have found the bug that causes this for Allegro, and am relatively sure
>>> what problem in clisp causes this.
>>>
>>> For Allegro, the following patch fixes the problem:
>>>
>>> (defun* resolve-symlinks (path)
>>> #-allegro (truenamize path)
>>> #+allegro (if (typep path 'logical-pathname)
>>> path
>>> (excl:pathname-resolve-symbolic-links path)))
>>>
>>
>> Will you please provide some commenting to explain why this is the right
>> thing to do here? To the extent that I understand this, it says
>> "resolve symlinks should not do anything to a logical pathname."
>>
>> Is that the correct behavior for RESOLVE-SYMLINKS? If so,
>>
>> 1. is it what automagically happens for the other lisp implementations.
>
> Yes. The first thing truenamize does is check whether it's argument is a
> logical pathname, and if that's the case, it returns it unchanged.
OK, possibly stupid follow-up question: if that is the case, is there
some reason why the call to excl:pathname-resolve-symbolic-links path
isn't pushed into TRUENAMIZE instead of sitting out here in resolve
symlinks?
For that matter, it seems like resolve-symlinks is simply an alias for
TRUENAMIZE, yes? If so, then aren't we doing the wrong thing by having
RESOLVE-SYMLINKS now do something different on Allegro than TRUENAMIZE does?
thanks,
r
_______________________________________________
asdf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
