This change was done so that using for example clbuild in Debian
becomes
possible again. Otherwise the packaged systems will interfere with the
clbuild or locally generated systems.
I still don't understand. The new behavior, even though now
documented, breaks all user expectations for how to use lisp packages,
and makes everything debian specific. That just doesn't seem like a
good idea.
I've never had a problem with using locally built systems that I put
in ~/.sbcl/systems: they come before /usr/share/common-lisp/systems/
in the asdf:*central-registry* by default and it works just fine.
And what's the issue with CLBuild? I just tried using it (for the
first time) to see what the deal was, and it really doesn't look
broken. (Note: I reverted the change in CLC, so this is with CLC fully-
active). It seems to work fine. Note that CLBuild overrode
asdf:*central-registry* to only contain its packages, so it shouldn't
even matter what CLC did to asdf:*central-registry*...
If you can describe the bug, maybe some other solution than
having .deb-provided lisp packages disabled by default might come to
mind.
./clbuild install cffi
[[[...downloads a bunch of stuff using darcs...]]]
./clbuild lisp
This is SBCL 1.0.31.0.debian, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp.
More information about SBCL is available at <http://www.sbcl.org/>.
SBCL is free software, provided as is, with absolutely no warranty.
It is mostly in the public domain; some portions are provided under
BSD-style licenses. See the CREDITS and COPYING files in the
distribution for more information.
* asdf:*central-registry*
(#P"/tmp/clbuild/systems/")
* (require 'cffi)
[[[...lots of spam, compiling and loading everything...]]]
* (cffi:defcfun ("abs" c-abs) :int (n :int))
C-ABS
* (c-abs -5)
5
James
BTW: I didn't get your previous email to the bug, only the close
notice...Seems kind of bogus behavior for a bugtracker.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
