Faré fah...@gmail.com writes:
Dear Lisp hackers,
I'd like to release ASDF 3.0 next week (maybe even later this week).
Can you test ASDF before I do?
I get asdf-pathname-test.script failure on SBCL:
These two expressions yield paths that are not pathname-equal
the first expression
Faré fah...@gmail.com writes:
Works for me. Weird. Which version of SBCL are you using?
1.1.6.14-76e4485
--
With best regards, Stas.
Faré fah...@gmail.com writes:
Works for me. Weird. Which version of SBCL are you using?
I also have a file /foo, if that matters.
--
With best regards, Stas.
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Stas Boukarev stass...@gmail.com wrote:
I also have a file /foo, if that m
Yes, that probably matters. I don't remember exactly how things go,
but I believe that what's going on is that ASDF by default gets
truenames at every step, which causes this behaviour.
This is bug worthy. Dunno that I have the courage to fix it before
3.0.0. Maybe a good target for procrastination, though.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •ReflectionCybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers.
You can tell whether a man is wise by his
Faré, your code is not valid in ECL because ECL does not support to use
run-program with output to text strings. This is not a bug but something
that would involve some major redesign of the function we have.
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe this is a bug
Dear Lisp hackers,
I'd like to release ASDF 3.0 next week (maybe even later this week).
Can you test ASDF before I do?
I'll have to produce some document explaining the innovations since
ASDF 2.26, 2.000 and/or 1.369, but for now here are just the changes
since 2.33.
As you can see, it's very
On ECL 12.12.1 on Mac OSX, test-run-program.script failed for me:
;;; Loading /Users/rpg/lisp/asdf/test/script-support.lisp
;;; Loading /Users/rpg/lisp/asdf/build/fasls/ecl/asdf.fas
Configuring ASDF
Enabling debugging
Being a bit verbose
Comparing directories
ASDF-TEST:*TEST-DIRECTORY* and
I believe this is a bug in ECL.
Its can be reproduced this way:
(in-package :asdf)
(let ((ok1 (format nil ; $ echo ok 1~%ok 1~%)))
(assert-equal
(with-output-to-string (s)
(let ((*verbose-out* t)
(*standard-output* s))
(run-shell-command echo ok ~D 1)))
ok1))
Or
