rpgoldman at sift.info
Thu Apr 23 11:56:27 PDT 2009
james anderson wrote:
> On 2009-04-23, at 16:30 , Alexander Repenning wrote:
>> I have not been looking at ASDF for a long time. We kept using
>> defsystem because, at the time, ASDF did not appear to have a way to
>> separate source and binary files, i.e., it tossed them into the same
>> folder. I remember reading a piece by the author indicating that he
>> was not planning to ever change that. Then again, did not somebody
>> create an extension to "fix" this issue?
> you can also accomplish this for a given system by specifying an
> explicit logical pathname and arranging that your logical host
> definition map the binaries differently than the sources.
> asdf pays only limited attention to logical pathnames, which means that
> the pathnames in restarts are wrong, but this approach suffices for a
> clean system build.
We use ASDF and ASDF-BINARY-LOCATIONS extensively and are pretty happy
with that combination.
OTOH, we have been very *unhappy* with our experiences with logical
pathnames. The ANSI Logical pathname spec seems like a very weak part
of the spec, so that in practice we avoid logical pathnames as much as
possible, because they don't work consistently across CL implementations.
More information about the Openmcl-devel