[Sbcl-devel] ASDF fix before release OK with me (Re: probably releasing sbcl-1.1...)

[<wil...@ai...>]

On Sun, Apr 06, 2008 at 08:52:27PM -0400, Richard M Kreuter wrote:
> William Harold Newman writes:
> > As far as I can see we neither have new bug reports coming in very
> > fast, nor outstanding bugs likely to be fixed cleanly and promptly, so
> > this looks like a reasonable candidate for bundling up and shipping.
> > 
> > If you disagree, speak up; the opportunity to influence a 1.x release
> > may not come your way for many moons hereafter.
> 
> There's a minor issue in the copy of ASDF in CVS, which is that stuff in
> the user's home directory can break building SBCL.  Would it be
> objectionable to insert the following small patch or similar at least
> into the 1.1 release, if not the post-1.1 branch?  

(I'm sorry about this tardy reply, obviously faster feedback would've
made particular sense in this situation.)

It's fine with me as a matter of general policy. It looks like a
problem worth fixing, and a problem which should be possible to fix
conservatively, and both your proposal and Dan's proposal look like a
conservative fixes. But in practice I don't feel I know ASDF well
enough to review it usefully myself: I could easily end up mistaken
either in high-minded architectural principle or at the level of
grotty in-practice unportability gotchas, like whether some
subcommunity is depending on patch-related trickery to make something
else work.

So if you are reasonably confident, or someone else is reasonably
confident, that either your patch or DB's reversion will work well,
then go for it. If you do, I'll plan to hold the release for a few
more days after that while we see whether smoke comes out. OTOH, if
we're still stuck on it by Thursday or Friday, I'm inclined to say to
heck with it, name what we have sbcl-1.1, and encourage the
stable-branch-or-whatever community to start up their core-fix
pipeline ASAP.:-|

> It shouldn't affect
> anything except during make-target-contrib.sh.  
> (An alternative
> suggestion from Dan Barlow on the cclan mailing list was to revert the
> copy of asdf.lisp to whatever version predated the preference loading
> stuff.  I don't have time right now to figure out whether that's a
> better option; could somebody take a look this at least for the 1.1
> release?)

> --- contrib/asdf/asdf.lisp      15 Feb 2008 14:42:31 -0000      1.27
> +++ contrib/asdf/asdf.lisp      7 Apr 2008 00:46:28 -0000
> @@ -1278,6 +1278,13 @@
>    (when (sb-ext:posix-getenv "SBCL_BUILDING_CONTRIB")
>      (pushnew :sbcl-hooks-require *features*)))
>  
> +#+sbcl
> +(eval-when (:load-toplevel)
> +  (when (sb-ext:posix-getenv "SBCL_BUILDING_CONTRIB")
> +    (remove-method
> +     #'load-preferences
> +     (find-method #'load-preferences () '(system basic-load-op)))))
> +
>  #+(and sbcl sbcl-hooks-require)
>  (progn
>    (defun module-provide-asdf (name)

-- 
William Harold Newman <wil...@ai...>
PGP key fingerprint 85 CE 1C BA 79 8D 51 8C  B9 25 FB EE E0 C3 E5 7C
Ubi saeva indignatio ulterius cor lacerare nequit. -- Jonathan Swift's epitaph