3.1.0.70 it is. Passes all tests for me, on Linux x64 on ccl clisp sbcl cmucl allegro allegromodern lispworks ecl_bytecodes ecl abcl xcl gcl Before some patches I just committed for xcl and gcl (!) 3.1.0.68 worked on Mac for Robert Goldman.
(Any volunteer to test on Genera? Corman? MCL? Windows?)
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Capital is past work. Undermining the rights of past and future workers in favor of present workers is sure to backfire on them tomorrow when their today's work is past and their tomorrow's work has been robbed already.
21.02.2014, 17:45, "Faré" fahree@gmail.com:
3.1.0.70 it is. Passes all tests for me, on Linux x64 on ccl clisp sbcl cmucl allegro allegromodern lispworks ecl_bytecodes ecl abcl xcl gcl Before some patches I just committed for xcl and gcl (!) 3.1.0.68 worked on Mac for Robert Goldman.
(Any volunteer to test on Genera? Corman? MCL? Windows?)
I have just compiled report for 3.1.0.67: http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-35.html
Looks good, no regressions.
The two CCL failures are due to the previously discussed CCL:NO-APPLICABLE-METHOD-EXISTS (SETF CCL:SLOT-VALUE-USING-CLASS) BTW, I have submitted a ticket for this: http://trac.clozure.com/ccl/ticket/1157
teepeedee2 fails sometimes due to it's own bugs (it includes copies of babel, alexandria in it's source code).
What we do now?
Retest on 3.1.0.70? Or run ":use :uiop" and differed warnings tests on 3.1.0.67?
I have just compiled report for 3.1.0.67: http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-35.html
Looks good, no regressions.
The two CCL failures are due to the previously discussed CCL:NO-APPLICABLE-METHOD-EXISTS (SETF CCL:SLOT-VALUE-USING-CLASS) BTW, I have submitted a ticket for this: http://trac.clozure.com/ccl/ticket/1157
Thanks!
What we do now?
Retest on 3.1.0.70? Or run ":use :uiop" and differed warnings tests on 3.1.0.67?
What about run 3.1.0.70 with :use :uiop first, and see what gives? If that changes is to go in, it better be before 3.1 release.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Many loathe the racist against other groups, but I everybody despises the racist against his own group — starting with himself.
So, I will change asdf like this:
(uiop/package:define-package :asdf/user (:nicknames :asdf-user) ;; TODO: it would be nice to have :UIOP in the list, ;; but we need test compatibility with cl-test-grid first.
- (:use :uiop/common-lisp :uiop/package :asdf/interface)) + (:use :cl :uiop))
Right?
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Anton Vodonosov avodonosov@yandex.ru wrote:
So, I will change asdf like this:
- (:use :uiop/common-lisp :uiop/package :asdf/interface))
- (:use :cl :uiop))
Right?
Please make it: (:use :uiop/common-lisp :uiop :asdf/interface)
Since uiop/package is reexport'ed by :uiop, but uiop/common-lisp isn't.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Keynesians: see how much more Cuba has benefited from Sandy's desolation? How blessed is it with that great natural resource, Hurricanes!
21.02.2014, 22:11, "Faré" fahree@gmail.com:
Please make it: (:use :uiop/common-lisp :uiop :asdf/interface)
Since uiop/package is reexport'ed by :uiop, but uiop/common-lisp isn't.
Results for asdf.3.1.0.70.use-uiop are ready on sbcl-1.1.11-linux-x86 ccl-1.9-f96-linux-x86 cmu-snapshot-2014-01__20e_unicode_-linux-x86
No changes from asdf.3.1.0.70 (except for one insignificant - CCL's bug with NO-APPLICABLE-METHOD-EXISTS (SETF SLOT-VALUE-USING-CLASS) didn't happen this time) http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-36.html
Tests continue on other lisps. (Very likely they will be successful too)
Best regards, - Anton
22.02.2014, 09:05, "Anton Vodonosov" avodonosov@yandex.ru:
Results for asdf.3.1.0.70.use-uiop are ready on [...] No changes from asdf.3.1.0.70
I meant of course, "since asdf.3.1.0.67"
[...] http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-36.html
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Anton Vodonosov avodonosov@yandex.ru wrote:
22.02.2014, 09:05, "Anton Vodonosov" avodonosov@yandex.ru:
Results for asdf.3.1.0.70.use-uiop are ready on [...] No changes from asdf.3.1.0.70
I meant of course, "since asdf.3.1.0.67"
http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-36.html
Wonderful! This change is pushed in ASDF 3.1.0.71. As usual, it is safer not to depend on it without a #+asdf3.1, until every implementation has ASDF 3.1.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org "I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy." — R. Lee Wrights
cl-test-grid tests have have completed on all the lisps we have on our linux:
sbcl-1.1.11-linux-x86 ccl-1.9-f96-linux-x86 cmu-snapshot-2014-01__20e_unicode_-linux-x86 clisp-2.49-unix-x86 ecl-13.5.1-unknown-linux-i686-bytecode ecl-13.5.1-unknown-linux-i686-lisp-to-c abcl-1.2.0-fasl42-linux-x86 abcl-1.2.1-fasl42-linux-x86
No regressions detected.
http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-36.html
In the report there are some failures on ABCL 1.2.1 and CLISP, these are not ASDF problems. ABCL failures seem like an ABCL bug, I have also reproduced them without new ASDF. CLISP crush on chillax.yason doesn't reproduce for me.
Best regards, - Anton
Faré wrote:
I have just compiled report for 3.1.0.67: http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-35.html
Looks good, no regressions.
The two CCL failures are due to the previously discussed CCL:NO-APPLICABLE-METHOD-EXISTS (SETF CCL:SLOT-VALUE-USING-CLASS) BTW, I have submitted a ticket for this: http://trac.clozure.com/ccl/ticket/1157
Thanks!
What we do now?
Retest on 3.1.0.70? Or run ":use :uiop" and differed warnings tests on 3.1.0.67?
What about run 3.1.0.70 with :use :uiop first, and see what gives? If that changes is to go in, it better be before 3.1 release.
That sounds good. I don't think we can turn on deferred warnings this time around, because that requires significant new testing. In particular, this may cause issues with ACL, which has not been extensively tested yet (at least not judging from the cl-test-grid logs I've seen so far).
Cheers, r
21.02.2014, 18:30, "Robert Goldman" rpgoldman@sift.net:
That sounds good. I don't think we can turn on deferred warnings this time around, because that requires significant new testing. In particular, this may cause issues with ACL, which has not been extensively tested yet (at least not judging from the cl-test-grid logs I've seen so far).
No, warnings have not be tested yet.
Fare, what :use clause should look like? Maybe
(:use :cl :uiop :asdf/interface)
?
And I assume the only place to be changed is the (:use :uiop/common-lisp :uiop/package ) form?
Best regards, - Anton
-
Anton Vodonosov -
Faré -
Robert Goldman