Robert Goldman <[email protected]> writes: > On 3/15/12 Mar 15 -9:05 PM, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I have a file swank-stuff.lisp that uses swank if available, with forms >> such as: >> >> #+swank (in-package :swank) >> #+swank … >> >> It contains also definitions that are alway available. >> >> If I define it as: >> >> (:file "swank-stuff" :depends-on ("other-stuff")) >> >> and compile it when I have swank, it produces a .fasl that contains a >> toplevel (in-pacakge :swank). Therefore when I load the system in an >> image without swank, it produces this error: >> >> ; Loading "com.informatimago.lse.unix-cli" >> . >> > Error: There is no package named "SWANK" . >> > While executing: ccl::set-package, in process listener(1). >> >> I tried to define it as: >> >> (:file "swank-stuff" >> :depends-on ("other-stuff") >> :in-order-to ((asdf:load-op (asdf:compile-op "swank-stuff")))) >> >> but it still doesn't work. Is there a way to make it so that >> swank-stuff is always loaded/compiled from source, instead of from the >> .fasl file? > > Sorry, why should that definition fix the problem? I.e., what is it > about compiling the file from source that ensures that swank will be > loaded, when loading the FASL doesn't?
The #+swank in the source file. > At any rate, there IS a way to ensure that swank-stuff is always loaded > from lisp instead of from fasl --- it's been discussed in the > developers' list in the past. > > I /thought/ this was a FAQ, or had been rolled into ASDF proper, but I > don't see anything. That's regrettable, since this is something that I > have seen (partially) implemented over and over. Didn't see anything about it in the ASDF Manual. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}. _______________________________________________ asdf-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
