On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 08:17:16AM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > Waldek: Thanks for your comments. See some comments below. > > On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 1:49 AM <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 06:47:35PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > > Thanks for this Git version of Poplog. It's really great! > > > > > > I have compile the latest Git version (commit > > > 3243718bda2a118e2fd5b02dc9f1a105f96b7d6f, per Tue Aug 10) > > > without any problems on my Linux Ubuntu 18.05. > > > > > .... > > > > Thanks for testing. > > ATM there is some confusion with version numbers. I think that the > > problem is fixed by inculding 'emacreadline' in startup image. Done > > in git repo, but also in _latest_ Birmingham tarball (which has > > the same version number as earler ones). > > > > > When I start your Git version of poplog pop11 I get the following version > number: > """ > $ ./poplog pop11 > Sussex Poplog (Version 16.0001 ons 11 aug 2021 06:43:10 CEST) > """ Version numbers in git are bumped only after several commits, commit hash idnetified the version. _latest_ Birmingham tarball corresponds to git repo from August 22 2020 (IIUC there were small changes later but probably none affecting your tests). You should see the same version number from _latest_ Birmingham tarball. Earrlier Birmingham tarball would give you 16.0000 (or maybe just 16.0) as version number. > > > The Git version don't have this problem, so I can now run directly them > > > as > > > $ poplog pop11 program.p > > > > > > Here are some of these programs that now works nicely from the command > > > line: > > > - http://hakank.org/poplog/emycin_test.p > > > - http://hakank.org/poplog/eprospect_test.p > > > - http://hakank.org/poplog/eshell_test.p > > > - http://hakank.org/poplog/poprulebase_medrules.p > > > > > > (I'm quite sure that I reported this problem with the "official > > version" > > > some years ago.) > > > > No, this is relatively recent thing, due to smaller startup image. > > > > > The problem of not working was about the "official version" and is this > post (from 2020-01-01): > https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00336.html .
There were several updates after that (which is not reflected in marking of tarballs). > > > About the only program that is discernible better when running in the > > Git > > > version is http://hakank.org/poplog/lucas_lehmer_test.p (from > > > http://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Lucas-Lehmer_test ). > > > The "official version" (often but not always) throws an "MEMORY ACCESS > > > VIOLATION" mishap after printing M127 but I've not seen this problem > > using > > > the Git version. > > > > I am not sure what happens on your machine, but I fetched your file > > on my machine when I tried: > > > > poplog pop11 lucas_lehmer_test.p > > > > I see flood of Access Violation nessages. Will look what into > > this. Thanks for info. This looks like rather nasty memory corruption. ATM I have no idea if this is bignum specific, or maybe the test just produces "right" allocatin pattern to trigger the problem. -- Waldek Hebisch
