Guillaume Le Vaillant <g...@posteo.net> writes: > SBCL and ECL are patched to use our cl-asdf because it is necessary to > build the sbcl-* and ecl-* packages. Also patching ABCL, CCL, and Clisp > sounds like a good idea. At least all the compilers would use the same > version of ASDF, and hopefully behave in the same way when looking for > configuration files.
Yup, that'd be neat :) Related to this, I've noticed another issue with SBCL packages: when an SBCL package has a dependency that's updated in ~/common-lisp, (asdf:load-system ...) tries to recompile it in its folder, which fails since /gnu/store is read-only. Example: - Apply the above patch or edit ~/.config/common-lisp/source-registry.conf to make sure ~/common-lisp is loaded before system packages. - Install sbcl-cl-cookie. - Check out https://github.com/fukamachi/quri: git clone https://github.com/fukamachi/quri ~/common-lisp/quri - Now run --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- $ sbcl * (asdf:load-system :cl-cookie) WARNING: System definition file #P"/gnu/store/81cwmspx3366vdjs6v20rnd8a0xyr6in-sbcl-cl-fad-0.7.6/share/common-lisp/sbcl/cl-fad/cl-fad.asd" contains definition for system "cl-fad-test". Please only define "cl-fad" and secondary systems with a name starting with "cl-fad/" (e.g. "cl-fad/test") in that file. debugger invoked on a SB-INT:SIMPLE-FILE-ERROR in thread #<THREAD "main thread" RUNNING {100B790203}>: Error opening #P"/gnu/store/22q4ydm0pagi4irz0clssgkhkyh115j8-sbcl-cl-cookie-0.9.10-1.cea55ae/lib/common-lisp/sbcl/cl-cookie/src/cl-cookie-tmpGHU3ALSV.fasl": Read-only file system --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Not sure what to do about this. I'm guessing that Common Lisp development is not practical with Guix' SBCL packages and I should just stick to the CL packages. Thoughts? -- Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
