Platform support: current status (3.1.7.7, linux)

[Robert Goldman]

On 8/22/16 Aug 22 -10:30 AM, Drew C wrote:
> Hey, 
> 
> How does this differ from the "Monthly-or-so" tests that Quicklisp does
> with cl-test-grid? Is there anything beyond `make test-lisp`, or is this
> a simple "try to build the ASDF master branch on Linux/x64 and report if
> it fails"?

My understanding is that cl-test-grid tests Quicklisp, and that
Quicklisp does not run the bleeding edge of ASDF.  But I could be wrong.

For example, using the report URL you provided, I see in the cell for
ccl-1.9:

(LOAD city-hash FAIL) needs newer ASDF,
ASDF/FIND-SYSTEM:LOAD-SYSTEM-DEFINITION-ERROR : Error while trying to
load definition for system swap-bytes from pathname
/home/testgrid/cl-test-grid/work-dir/agent/quicklisp/dists/quicklisp/software/swap-bytes-20151218-git/swap-bytes.asd:
You need ASDF >= 3.1 to load this system correctly.

Best,
r

> 
> For example, I notice that they used sbcl-1.0.58 in the last test[1] .
> What issues did you have with those earlier versions that were'fixed' in
> 1.1.13? Is there a report of your testing available that I could look at
> beyond a quick email? 
> 
> Beyond that, looks good! 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Drew Crampsie
> 
> [1] https://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/ql/quicklisp-2016-06-28-diff.html
> 
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Elias Pipping <pipping.elias at icloud.com
> <mailto:pipping.elias at icloud.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Dear list,
> 
>     I've been meaning to find out what lisp compilers/interpreters are
>     effectively supported
>     by current ASDF, to the point where they pass `make test-lisp`
>     without a single (potentially
>     harmless error), such as those stemming e.g. from unexpected warnings.
>     I’ve now gotten around to a bit of testing. For future reference, on
>     a recent Linux, with
>     ASDF 3.1.7.7, the answer is as follows:
> 
>     ABCL: 1.2.0 (2013-06-01) or later looks good(*)
>     Allegro CL: 10.0 Express Edition looks good(**)
>     CCL: 1.10 (2014-09-12) or later looks good(***)
>     CLISP: 2.49 (2010-07-07) looks good; hg checkout segfaults in
>     asdf-pathname-test.script
>     CMUCL: 20e (2013-09-28) or later looks good(+)
>     ECL: 16.0.0 (2015-08-28) or later looks good
>     LispWorks: HobbyistDV/Professional/Enterprise edition of 7.0
>     (2015-05-05) would probably look good(++1)
>     LispWorks: Professional edition of 6.1 (and presumably others)
>     currently emit an unexpected warning(++2)
>     MKCL: 1.1.9 hangs in test-try-refinding.script; git checkout looks good
>     SBCL: 1.1.13 (2013-10-31) or later looks good(+++)
> 
>     (*) sys::concatenate-fasls requires 1.2.0 or later
>     (**) 9.0 can no longer be downloaded so that I could not test with
>     earlier versions
>     (***) 1.9 and earlier are broken on recent versions of linux, see
>     http://trac.clozure.com/ccl/ticket/1208
>     <http://trac.clozure.com/ccl/ticket/1208>
>     (+) 20c/20d has known CLOS issues.
>     (++1) I do not have access to them, so I cannot say for sure. The
>     Hobbyist and Personal edition
>     lack application delivery and image saving functionality,
>     respectively. The tests put those features
>     to the test and currently fail if they’re unavailable.
>     (++2) causing `make test-lisp` to fail; This started with ASDF
>     3.1.7.5; 3.1.7.4 was fine.
>     (+++) sb-debug:print-backtrace requires 1.1.5 or later, bundles
>     require 1.1.13 or later
> 
> 
>     Elias
> 
>