Bug#591054: cl-asdf: circular dependency with common-lisp-controller

[Faré]

On 5 August 2010 01:50, Desmond O. Chang <dochang at gmail.com> wrote:
> Your idea is nice.  I agree to reduce the current complexity.
>
> I put my modifications in the 'next' branches of dh-lisp and c-l-c.
> Review them please.
>
Your modifications in dh-lisp are more radical than I proposed,
as you seem to be not only removing the dependency on c-l-c,
but also the call to c-l-c scripts when those scripts are present.
This effectively disables the customized image feature, which I believe
is not used by anyone anyway (how does one even build a customized image?).

This leaves c-l-c as a mere pre-compiler of ASDF. (c-l-c used to also be
a pre-configurer of ASDF, which was essential to make ASDF1 useful,
but is now builtin to ASDF2, admittedly no little thanks to the precedent
of c-l-c itself).

Once again, at this point I believe the community would be better served
if instead we made ASDF2 universally available through
(require :asdf).

> I am not going to merge them until other members agree with us.
I think your change is more radical than you thought, but I don't disagree
with it either.

>> And of course, it's better to work upstream to have ASDF2 included
>> everywhere rather than to make it a special Debian thing.
>
> Could you give us a detailed proposal for discussion?  We need more
> comments.
>
Certainly.

ABCL, CCL, CMUCL, ECL, SBCL, in their latest revision control systems,
all come bundled with ASDF2. As far as debian-supported common lisp
implementations go, that leaves GCL(cvs) and CLISP to be bundled with ASDF.
We could patch the sources so that they include ASDF as a base module,
and send the patch upstream for inclusion - or first try to convince
upstream to do the hard work.

[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
...so this guy walks into a bar.
"The usual, Mr. Descartes?" the barman asked.
"I think not," Rene replied, and promptly disappeared.