From: Faré <fa...@gm...> - 2010-09-30 17:57:08
|
On 30 September 2010 13:09, Robert Goldman <rpg...@si...> wrote: > note that this is a complication that is unique to ASDF2. In ASDF1, all > configuration is done in the user's normal lisp initialization, so > user-configuration suppression will honor the implementations' > configuration control API. > Whatever the script is doing that was ensuring the systems will be found despite lack of configuration in ASDF1 will keep making things work in ASDF2; the user configuration file may be read, but whatever makes ASDF1 work will make those settings irrelevant. But yes, if there were a protocol to specify that we should skip user and/or system configuration, that would be nice. Problem being: if ASDF is to remain an optional component, then we'll need some non-portable thing that fetches this information differently from each and every of the supported implementations. Sigh. [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] The reason truth is stranger than fiction is that fiction has to make sense. |