Hello *,

Today I've committed to the tree the following packages (all pmasked):

dev-lisp/asdf-2.33-r4
dev-lisp/uiop-2.33-r1
dev-lisp/sbcl-1.1.6-r4
dev-lisp/clisp-2.49-r7.ebuild
dev-lisp/clozurecl-1.9_p1
dev-lisp/ecls-12.12.1-r4
dev-lisp/cmucl-20d-r3
sci-mathematics/maxima-5.30.0
sci-mathematics/fricas-1.2.0

The lisp stuff is from the lisp overlay. I haven't used the overlay specific eclasses, just the standard helpers (doins etc.).

clozurecl-1.9-r3 from the overlay is a live ebuild; are some of the recent updates essential? I replaced it by the today's snapshot (I've put it to dev.gentoo.org).

In clisp, I've corrected the dependency on pari (alas, it has to be <pari-2.5), and added an upstream patch which may be needed for new gcc versions.

All abuilds are EAPI=5. Now, when a lisp used for maxima or fricas is upgraded, these CASs will be upgraded automatically - this is exactly the main point of EAPI5. It would be great to unmask all these packages soon, not to wait for years. Any specific reasons not to do so for any of these packages? Should something be improved before unmasking? Please, test! And inform me. Testsuites of maxima and fricas are OK, so, the lisps cannot be broken. But I am not so sure about the asdf stuff.

Andrey

which I reported and seems to be related to slower hardware when running the self-tests. This problem is still present with sbcl-1.1.6-r4. I'm not sure about the threads issue that's also reported in the same bug. It seems to me that sbcl, at least here, isn't built in parallel.