[gentoo-dev] are there any lisps in the default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl profile?

[gentoo-dev] are there any lisps in the default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl profile?

[Andrey Grozin]

Hello *,

grozin@bilbo /home/gentoo/sci-mathematics/maxima $ pkgcheck scan
gentoo -- updating git cache: commit date: 2023-07-23
sci-mathematics/maxima
   UnstableOnly: for arches: [ ppc, x86 ], all versions are unstable: [ 
5.46.0-r1, 5.47.0 ]
   PotentialStable: version 5.46.0-r1: slot(0), stabled arch: [ amd64 ], 
potentials: [ ~ppc, ~x86 ]
   RequiredUseDefaults: version 5.46.0-r1: profile: 
'default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl' (4 total) failed REQUIRED_USE: ( clisp || 
clozurecl || clozurecl64 || cmucl || ecls || gcl || sbcl )
   RequiredUseDefaults: version 5.47.0: profile: 
'default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl' (3 total) failed REQUIRED_USE: ( clisp || 
clozurecl || clozurecl64 || cmucl || ecls || gcl || sbcl )

It seems that there are no lisps in this profile. This may be correct. But 
where are all lisps masked? I see only

grozin@bilbo /home/gentoo/profiles $ find -name package.mask | xargs fgrep 
lisp
./arch/powerpc/ppc64/package.mask:dev-lisp/sbcl
./arch/powerpc/ppc64/32ul/package.mask:-dev-lisp/sbcl
./arch/powerpc/ppc64/64le/package.mask:-dev-lisp/sbcl
./arch/sparc/64ul/package.mask:dev-lisp/sbcl

sbcl is masked on arches to which it is not ported. Fine. But I don't see 
where lisps are masked specifically for musl.

This may be correct. As far as I know, sbcl cannot work on musl systems; 
don't know about other lisps. If this is so, maxima should also be masked 
on musl.

Andrey

Re: [gentoo-dev] are there any lisps in the default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl profile?

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 790 bytes --]

>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023, Andrey Grozin wrote:

> It seems that there are no lisps in this profile. This may be correct.
> But where are all lisps masked? I see only

> grozin@bilbo /home/gentoo/profiles $ find -name package.mask | xargs
> fgrep lisp
> ./arch/powerpc/ppc64/package.mask:dev-lisp/sbcl
> ./arch/powerpc/ppc64/32ul/package.mask:-dev-lisp/sbcl
> ./arch/powerpc/ppc64/64le/package.mask:-dev-lisp/sbcl
> ./arch/sparc/64ul/package.mask:dev-lisp/sbcl

The flags are masked in arch/base:

$ find . -name 'use.mask' -exec grep -E '^(clisp|clozurecl|clozurecl64|cmucl|ecls|gcl|sbcl)\b' {} +
./features/musl/use.mask:sbcl
./arch/base/use.mask:clisp
./arch/base/use.mask:clozurecl
./arch/base/use.mask:cmucl
./arch/base/use.mask:ecls
./arch/base/use.mask:gcl
./arch/base/use.mask:sbcl

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] are there any lisps in the default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl profile?

[Andrey Grozin]

On Sun, 23 Jul 2023, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> $ find . -name 'use.mask' -exec grep -E '^(clisp|clozurecl|clozurecl64|cmucl|ecls|gcl|sbcl)\b' {} +
> ./features/musl/use.mask:sbcl
> ./arch/base/use.mask:clisp
> ./arch/base/use.mask:clozurecl
> ./arch/base/use.mask:cmucl
> ./arch/base/use.mask:ecls
> ./arch/base/use.mask:gcl
> ./arch/base/use.mask:sbcl
Yes, but the flags for lisps running on amd64 are unmasket in 
profiles/arch/amd64/use.mask:

grozin@bilbo /home/gentoo/profiles/arch/amd64 $ grep -E 
'^-(clisp|clozurecl|clozurecl64|cmucl|ecls|gcl|sbcl)' use.mask
-clisp
-ecls
-gcl
-sbcl

OK, sbcl is masked on musl. But why clisp, ecls, or gcl cannot be used in 
the amd64 musl profile?

(I don't know if they actually work on amd64 musl systems, or if anybody 
ever tried to do so. I just ask a formal question about Gentoo profiles 
system.)

Andrey

Re: [gentoo-dev] are there any lisps in the default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl profile?

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 896 bytes --]

>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023, Andrey Grozin wrote:

> OK, sbcl is masked on musl. But why clisp, ecls, or gcl cannot be used
> in the amd64 musl profile?

> (I don't know if they actually work on amd64 musl systems, or if
> anybody ever tried to do so. I just ask a formal question about Gentoo
> profiles system.)

pkgcheck's mesage was this:

  RequiredUseDefaults: version 5.47.0: profile: 'default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl' (3 total) failed REQUIRED_USE: ( clisp || clozurecl || clozurecl64 || cmucl || ecls || gcl || sbcl )

I think what happens is this: sbcl is masked on musl, but it is the only
version that is enabled in the ebuild by the IUSE="+sbcl" default.
Therefore, none of the versions available on musl is enabled there,
resulting in an unsatisfied REQUIRED_USE.

Moving the + from sbcl to e.g. clisp would get rid of the message, but
maybe this is not an acceptable solution.

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] are there any lisps in the default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl profile?

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 355 bytes --]

>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023, Ulrich Mueller wrote:

> I think what happens is this: sbcl is masked on musl, but it is the only
> version that is enabled in the ebuild by the IUSE="+sbcl" default.
> Therefore, none of the versions available on musl is enabled there,
> resulting in an unsatisfied REQUIRED_USE.

I meant "lisp engines" there, not "versions".

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] are there any lisps in the default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl profile?

[Andrey Grozin]

On Sun, 23 Jul 2023, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> I think what happens is this: sbcl is masked on musl, but it is the only
> version that is enabled in the ebuild by the IUSE="+sbcl" default.
> Therefore, none of the versions available on musl is enabled there,
> resulting in an unsatisfied REQUIRED_USE.
Thank you. Probably, pkgcheck complains because of +sbcl, and sbcl is 
masked. sbcl is the best lisp for maxima on systems where it exists, 
therefore it is the default. If it does not exist, a user can try some 
other lisp. So, I'm going to continue to ignore this complaint.

By the way, I've just found (and fixed) another minor problem. Due to some 
(uninteresting) technical reasons, clozurecl in maxima ebuild is 
controlled by the use flags clozurecl (on 32-bit arches) and clozurecl64 
(on 64-bit arches). The clozurecl flag is masked in arch/base/use.mask and 
unmasked in arch/x86/use.mask (correctly). But clozurecl was not 
controlled in the same way. Now I mask it in arch/base/use.mask and unmask 
in arch/amd64/use.mask.

Andrey

Re: [gentoo-dev] are there any lisps in the default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl profile?

[Violet Purcell]

On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 12:11:51PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023, Andrey Grozin wrote:
> 
> > OK, sbcl is masked on musl. But why clisp, ecls, or gcl cannot be used
> > in the amd64 musl profile?
> 
> > (I don't know if they actually work on amd64 musl systems, or if
> > anybody ever tried to do so. I just ask a formal question about Gentoo
> > profiles system.)
> 
> pkgcheck's mesage was this:
> 
>   RequiredUseDefaults: version 5.47.0: profile: 'default/linux/amd64/17.0/musl' (3 total) failed REQUIRED_USE: ( clisp || clozurecl || clozurecl64 || cmucl || ecls || gcl || sbcl )
> 
> I think what happens is this: sbcl is masked on musl, but it is the only
> version that is enabled in the ebuild by the IUSE="+sbcl" default.
> Therefore, none of the versions available on musl is enabled there,
> resulting in an unsatisfied REQUIRED_USE.
> 
> Moving the + from sbcl to e.g. clisp would get rid of the message, but
> maybe this is not an acceptable solution.
> 
> Ulrich

Hi!
As of https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/30752, sbcl is no longer
masked on musl, however it seems that sbcl never got removed from
use.mask. I'll make a PR to fix this ASAP.

- Violet