On 4/22/11 Apr 22 -3:05 PM, Zach Beane wrote: > Faré <[email protected]> writes: > >> On 22 April 2011 13:59, Faré <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> After building the Quicklisp universe again with 2.014.8, it's clear >>>> that many projects (over 30) are affected by the >>>> ASDF:SYSTEM-DEFINITION-PATHNAME changes. It seems like anything that >>>> uses cffi-grovel is broken, e.g. osicat, gsll, shuffletron, hemlock, and >>>> many more. >>>> >>> Oops. I'll remove that cerror for now, and just have a docstring. >>> >>> Thanks for the testing... >>> >> Please retry with 2.014.9. > > I've retried with 2.014.9, and the cffi-grovel-related problems are > gone, but there's an interesting new problem. > > 2.014.9 includes this line: > > (declaim (optimize (speed 2) (debug 3) (safety 3))) ; XXXXX debug only > > At (safety 3), SBCL is more aggressive about type-checking CLOS slots. > As a result of the new declaration of the VERSION slot of a component to > be of type STRING, several projects have systems that fail to load due > to type errors: > > - cl-jpeg uses ":version 1.025" > > - nekthuth uses ":version (format nil "~A" +nekthuth-version+)", > apparently expecting it to be evaluated > > - js-parser and jwacs use ":version *version*" > > - meta-sexp uses ":version +meta-sexp-version+" > > - rutils uses ":version '(0 3 1)" > > Was the :version option evaluated in the past?
I believe not. I am looking at the definition of the now pretty old SHOP2 system and I see: :version #.cl-user::+shop-version+ I suppose that would have worked even if the version /was/ evaluated, though, since strings would evaluate to themselves.... I find it relatively easy to believe that no one was looking seriously at these versions, since many of the versions in the wild, even the ones that are correctly string-valued, are semantically defective. r _______________________________________________ asdf-devel mailing list [email protected] http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
