I pulled a fresh copy of the current head and I found one issue:
Mac OS X / Allegro / BDB 4.5 - no probs
Mac OS X / Allegro / CLSQL - map-index-remove failed
Mac OS X / SBCL / BDB 4.5 - no probs
Mac OS X / SBCL / CLSQL - no probs
(I don't have a postgres test db setup at the moment)
Ian
On Mar 16, 2008, at 3:15 PM, Robert L. Read wrote:
Dear Leslie and Ian Alex and Henrik,
I can see now that I did not apply Leslie's updated patch. I
attempted
to rollback and reapply the correct patch. Unfortunately, I was
unable
to get to a "green" state under any system. I find darcs much
harder to
work with than CVS (however, I had a great deal of experience with
CVS.)
So, unfortunately, Leslie, I cannot re-apply our patch. If you have
working code, please compute another patch directly against the
CURRENT
tip of the main development branch in the repository. I will then
apply
this and see if I can get to green.
Furthermore, in attempt to solve this problem, I restored my local
copy
to the head of the main repository, and am green only under BDB.
I'm afraid things have gotten a little out of control, although I
think
we are using proper discipline and committing things only when we are
green on the local systems that we can test on. However, I would like
to get the main repository back to a "known working" state for my
systems (SBCL, BDB, Postgres, Postmodern, X86 architecture.)
I think the best way to do this is for Leslie to get green and send
me
a diff; if I still have problems after that I may have to look into
Ian's checkins. As a last resort we can rollback patches until we get
to something working...but that is a last resort.
If I can't get things worked out after Leslie sends me the patch,
then
I may have to ask you guys to test against the head and send me your
results on your systems.
Ian wants to make a release in a few weeks, and we really need to get
back to a solid state ahead of that.
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 12:23 +0100, Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
Dear Robert,
I posted an updated version of the patch shortly after, and it seems
you applied the obsolete one. Can you check?
I did personally have some problems...perhaps because Bordeaux
Threads
is not claiming to work on x86_64 architectures, darn it!
Hrm, I guess it should just be a thin compatibility layer for SBCL.
Does SBCL officially support threading on ia64?
So the upshot is that I am green under BDB and postmodern with your
changes, except for your test itself, which fails for me on sbcl
1.0.13
on an x86_64, apparently more because of the threading than the
reapoing.
I will look into this when we have sorted out the patch problem.
Leslie
_______________________________________________
elephant-devel site list
elephant-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel
_______________________________________________
elephant-devel site list
elephant-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel
_______________________________________________
elephant-devel site list
elephant-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel
