On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:49:30PM +0600, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:18:08 +0600, Josh Elsasser wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:59:44AM +0600, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > >> Hi, Ports! > >> > >> This update package SBCL to the latest release 1.0.37. > > > > Is there any particular reason you need this version of SBCL, or is it > > just because it's several months old by now? > > > Maxima gives better performance when using SBCL (compared to ECL and > Clisp). I wanted to see would be to increase performance, performance > has not changed, but all tests pass safely. > I decided to send a diff can anyone be useful.
In that case I don't see any particular need to update the port right now. Thanks for the patch though, it's always good to see more people interested. > >> Tested on i386. > > > > I assume this means that 'make regress' showed only expected failures. > > > regress.log (I can send a fully): > ... > Finished running tests. > Status: > Expected failure: debug.impure.lisp / (UNDEFINED-FUNCTION BUG-353) > Unexpected success: debug.impure.lisp / (THROW NO-SUCH-TAG) > Expected failure: packages.impure.lisp / USE-PACKAGE-CONFLICT-SET > Expected failure: packages.impure.lisp / IMPORT-SINGLE-CONFLICT > ok > //apparent success (reached end of run-tests.sh normally) > Wed Mar 30 07:21:43 YEKST 2010 That unexpected success is probably a sign that something is wrong somewhere, possibly with a stack trace not looking right. I'll check and see if this still happens with the current git head, thanks.
