On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:13 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > > There is
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=465560 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. Steve
