[gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[Chema Alonso]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 584 bytes --]

Hi all,

WRT bugs 485630 [1] and 485632 [2], I've tested the last vesions of
sbcl and asdf, particularly:

dev-lisp/sbcl-1.1.12
dev-lisp/asdf-3.0.2.4
dev-lisp/uiop-3.0.2.4

They build and run with no problesms on amd64. All tests pass.

As an amd64 arch tester is ok for me to stabilize them.

Any comments/problems?

BTW sbcl-1.1.14 is out there, I've tested it on amd64 using the ebuild
for 1.1.12 and it builds and runs fine. Is it ok to push it to the tree?

Thanks.

Regards.

[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=485630
[2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=485632

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[grozin]

On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Chema Alonso wrote:
> BTW sbcl-1.1.14 is out there, I've tested it on amd64 using the ebuild
> for 1.1.12 and it builds and runs fine. Is it ok to push it to the tree?
Thanks, I've committed it.

> WRT bugs 485630 [1] and 485632 [2], I've tested the last vesions of
> sbcl and asdf, particularly:
>
> dev-lisp/sbcl-1.1.12
> dev-lisp/asdf-3.0.2.4
> dev-lisp/uiop-3.0.2.4
>
> They build and run with no problesms on amd64. All tests pass.
>
> As an amd64 arch tester is ok for me to stabilize them.
>
> Any comments/problems?
I think it's OK to stabilize it on amd64.

The bug #486552 is a major problem: nobody can compile any version of sbcl 
on x86, starting from some moment between May and August 2013, due to some 
change in something completely unrelated to sbcl. So, on x86 it definitely 
should not be stabilized.

By the way, the original reporter of this bug had this problem on an amd64 
system; only after he fully updated it to ~amd64, the problem had 
disappeared. I suppose you have tested on a stable amd64, right? So, it 
seems that the problem disappeared, and stabilizing on amd64 is OK.

Andrey

Re: [gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[Chema Alonso]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2541 bytes --]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 02:11:05AM +0700, grozin@gentoo.org wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Chema Alonso wrote:
> > BTW sbcl-1.1.14 is out there, I've tested it on amd64 using the ebuild
> > for 1.1.12 and it builds and runs fine. Is it ok to push it to the tree?
> Thanks, I've committed it.
> 
> > WRT bugs 485630 [1] and 485632 [2], I've tested the last vesions of
> > sbcl and asdf, particularly:
> >
> > dev-lisp/sbcl-1.1.12
> > dev-lisp/asdf-3.0.2.4
> > dev-lisp/uiop-3.0.2.4
> >
> > They build and run with no problesms on amd64. All tests pass.
> >
> > As an amd64 arch tester is ok for me to stabilize them.
> >
> > Any comments/problems?
> I think it's OK to stabilize it on amd64.

Done

> 
> The bug #486552 is a major problem: nobody can compile any version of sbcl 
> on x86, starting from some moment between May and August 2013, due to some 
> change in something completely unrelated to sbcl. So, on x86 it definitely 
> should not be stabilized.
> 
> By the way, the original reporter of this bug had this problem on an amd64 
> system; only after he fully updated it to ~amd64, the problem had 
> disappeared. I suppose you have tested on a stable amd64, right? So, it 
> seems that the problem disappeared, and stabilizing on amd64 is OK.
> 

I tested it on an stable amd64 system, no problems found apart from some
'cosmetic' warnings found by repoman:

  ebuild.minorsyn               12
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r1.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 50
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r1.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 62
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r2.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 51
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r2.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 64
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.10.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.10.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.11.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.11.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.12.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.12.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.14.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 56
   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.14.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 69

These are easy to fix though =)

Will you take care of them?

Thanks.

Regards.

> Andrey
> 

-- 

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[Ulrich Mueller]

>>>>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, Chema Alonso wrote:

> I tested it on an stable amd64 system, no problems found apart from some
> 'cosmetic' warnings found by repoman:

>   ebuild.minorsyn               12
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r1.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 50
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r1.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 62
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r2.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 51
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r2.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 64
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.10.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.10.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.11.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.11.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.12.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.12.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.14.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 56
>    dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.14.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 69

Using vi? ;-)

Hint: app-emacs/ebuild-mode will automatically take care of such
whitespace issues.

Ulrich

Re: [gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[grozin]

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, Chema Alonso wrote:
> I tested it on an stable amd64 system, no problems found apart from some
> 'cosmetic' warnings found by repoman:
>
>  ebuild.minorsyn               12
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r1.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 50
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r1.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 62
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r2.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 51
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r2.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 64
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.10.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.10.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.11.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.11.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.12.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.12.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.14.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 56
>   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.14.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 69
>
> These are easy to fix though =)
>
> Will you take care of them?
These lines are not in the ebuilds proper, but in lisp code embedded into 
ebuilds. I think it makes no sense to fix them.

Andrey

Re: [gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[Chema Alonso]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1619 bytes --]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 05:23:29PM +0700, grozin@gentoo.org wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, Chema Alonso wrote:
> > I tested it on an stable amd64 system, no problems found apart from some
> > 'cosmetic' warnings found by repoman:
> >
> >  ebuild.minorsyn               12
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r1.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 50
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r1.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 62
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r2.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 51
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.0.55-r2.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 64
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.10.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.10.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.11.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.11.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.12.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 57
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.12.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 70
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.14.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 56
> >   dev-lisp/sbcl/sbcl-1.1.14.ebuild: Ebuild contains leading spaces on line: 69
> >
> > These are easy to fix though =)
> >
> > Will you take care of them?
> These lines are not in the ebuilds proper, but in lisp code embedded into 
> ebuilds. I think it makes no sense to fix them.
> 
> Andrey
> 

Changing them to tabs makes the warnings go away and respects the look
of the lisp code.


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[Ulrich Mueller]

>>>>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2013, Chema Alonso wrote:

>> These lines are not in the ebuilds proper, but in lisp code embedded into 
>> ebuilds. I think it makes no sense to fix them.

> Changing them to tabs makes the warnings go away and respects the look
> of the lisp code.

For Lisp code embedded in Emacs ebuilds, I've always used the old
shell-archive trick:

    sed -e 's/^X//' >"${D}"/etc/sbclrc <<-EOF
	;;; The following is required if you want source location functions to
	;;; work in SLIME, for example.
	X
	(setf (logical-pathname-translations "SYS")
	X	'(("SYS:SRC;**;*.*.*" #p"/usr/$(get_libdir)/sbcl/src/**/*.*")
	X	  ("SYS:CONTRIB;**;*.*.*" #p"/usr/$(get_libdir)/sbcl/**/*.*")))
	X
	;;; Setup ASDF2
	(load "/etc/common-lisp/gentoo-init.lisp")
        EOF

This would silence repoman, and both the ebuild and the output file
look nice.

Ulrich

Re: [gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[Chema Alonso]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1857 bytes --]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 02:11:05AM +0700, grozin@gentoo.org wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Chema Alonso wrote:
> > BTW sbcl-1.1.14 is out there, I've tested it on amd64 using the ebuild
> > for 1.1.12 and it builds and runs fine. Is it ok to push it to the tree?
> Thanks, I've committed it.
> 
> > WRT bugs 485630 [1] and 485632 [2], I've tested the last vesions of
> > sbcl and asdf, particularly:
> >
> > dev-lisp/sbcl-1.1.12
> > dev-lisp/asdf-3.0.2.4
> > dev-lisp/uiop-3.0.2.4
> >
> > They build and run with no problesms on amd64. All tests pass.
> >
> > As an amd64 arch tester is ok for me to stabilize them.
> >
> > Any comments/problems?
> I think it's OK to stabilize it on amd64.
> 
> The bug #486552 is a major problem: nobody can compile any version of sbcl 
> on x86, starting from some moment between May and August 2013, due to some 
> change in something completely unrelated to sbcl. So, on x86 it definitely 
> should not be stabilized.
> 
> By the way, the original reporter of this bug had this problem on an amd64 
> system; only after he fully updated it to ~amd64, the problem had 
> disappeared. I suppose you have tested on a stable amd64, right? So, it 
> seems that the problem disappeared, and stabilizing on amd64 is OK.
> 
> Andrey
> 

Hi,

There are problems [1] with the stabilization of =dev-lisp/asdf-3.0.2.4
on amd64.
Apparently =dev-lisp/asdf-3.0.2.4 and =dev-lisp/gentoo-init-0.1 can't
be installed at the same time due to asdf-3.0.2.4 dependencies:

DEPEND="!dev-lisp/cl-${PN}
        !dev-lisp/asdf-binary-locations
        !dev-lisp/gentoo-init
        !<dev-lisp/asdf-2.33-r3
        doc? ( virtual/texi2dvi )"

Sorry for not to test more thoroughly.

Should I rollback the stabilization?

Thanks in advance.

[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=485632#c2

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[grozin]

On Wed, 11 Dec 2013, Chema Alonso wrote:
> There are problems [1] with the stabilization of =dev-lisp/asdf-3.0.2.4
> on amd64.
> Apparently =dev-lisp/asdf-3.0.2.4 and =dev-lisp/gentoo-init-0.1 can't
> be installed at the same time due to asdf-3.0.2.4 dependencies:
>
> DEPEND="!dev-lisp/cl-${PN}
>        !dev-lisp/asdf-binary-locations
>        !dev-lisp/gentoo-init
>        !<dev-lisp/asdf-2.33-r3
>        doc? ( virtual/texi2dvi )"
>
> Sorry for not to test more thoroughly.
>
> Should I rollback the stabilization?
Maybe, while we are at it, stabilize dev-lisp/clisp-2.49-r8 and 
dev-lisp/common-lisp-controller-5.13-r1, to get rid of 
dev-lisp/gentoo-init and dev-lisp/asdf-binary-locations? Are there any 
more packages in stable which depend on gentoo-init and 
asdf-binary-locations?

Andrey

Re: [gentoo-lisp] Stabilization of last versions of sbcl and asdf on amd64

[grozin]

On Wed, 11 Dec 2013, Chema Alonso wrote:
> Changing them to tabs makes the warnings go away and respects the look
> of the lisp code.
If so, then, of course, why you may replace them by tabs. No problem.

Andrey