ASDF 3.1.7.43 is 3.2 release candidate

[Anton Vodonosov]

Results are coming, these lisps are ready:

    ccl-1.10-r16196-f96-linux-x86
    cmu-snapshot-2016-12__21b_unicode_-linux-x86
    sbcl-1.3.12-linux-x86

The following report is the part of the diff including only results where new version fails:
https://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-54.html

As we can see, other systems than asdf-systems-connections fails with the
" OPERATION instances must only be created through MAKE-OPERATION." too.
This error constitures the majority of failures.

To make it easier seeing other errors, the next report filters out the
" OPERATION instances must only be created through MAKE-OPERATION."
and leaves only other errors:
https://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-55.html

Notable are the cl-python failure, the "Unknown CFFI type (:STRUCT TUNION1)" error,
the "Component CLSQL-UFFI-SYSTEM::UFFI does not match version 2.0, required by #<SYSTEM "clsql-uffi">"

Best regards,
- Anton




26.12.2016, 11:57, "Anton Vodonosov" <avodonosov at yandex.ru>:
> Tests are running (wht updated slime, cffi, asdf-systems-connections)
>
> 26.12.2016, 08:22, "Faré" <fahree at gmail.com>:
>>  I see no unexplained failure in Anton's previous test run, but it's
>>  possible that the explained failures are hiding further failures down
>>  the line.
>>
>>  Anton: can you re-run with an updated asdf-systems-connections AND an
>>  updated SLIME?
>>
>>  —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
>>  Have the courage to take your own thoughts seriously, for they will shape you.
>>                 — Albert Einstein
>>
>>  On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Faré <fahree at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>   I see a lot of failures on ECL that seem related to using swank,
>>>   except the swank package is not defined. That also might be caused by
>>>   a bad and/or old SLIME, that was badly abusing some asdf internals in
>>>   an incoherent way. Can you try with the latest SLIME?
>>>
>>>   Note that I am quite angry at the SLIME maintainers because I have
>>>   tried many times to offer them fixes to swank.asd but they never
>>>   merged any of my proposed pull requests.
>>>
>>>   Otherwise, it looks mostly good.
>>>
>>>   NB: When there is an error from a gcc subprocess, you don't seem to be
>>>   capturing the output, which goes directly to fd 1 / fd 2 of the
>>>   process, as inherited by the subprocess. Maybe you can fix that in
>>>   cl-test-grid?
>>>
>>>   —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
>>>   The idea is not to confront bad ideas but to come up with good ideas.
>>>   Otherwise, your enemies define the game and you are the loyal opposition.
>>>          — Terence McKenna
>>>
>>>   On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 7:22 PM, Anton Vodonosov <avodonosov at yandex.ru> wrote:
>>>>   It is the same system.
>>>>
>>>>   When previous result was CRASH and new one is FAIL, it might be the same error. But when the previous was OK and new is FAIL, it's more suspicious.
>>>>
>>>>   For example:
>>>>           (LOAD exscribe OK)
>>>>   vs
>>>>           (LOAD exscribe FAIL) QUICKLISP-CLIENT:SYSTEM-NOT-FOUND : System "fare-scripts/rescript" not found
>>>>
>>>>   26.12.2016, 02:36, "Faré" <fahree at gmail.com>:
>>>>>   On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Anton Vodonosov <avodonosov at yandex.ru> wrote:
>>>>>>    https://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-52.html
>>>>>
>>>>>   It's not looking too bad, but there are a lot of new failures with the
>>>>>   latest sbcl, where some dll is not found. Can that be explained by
>>>>>   your running on a different setup where some libraries are missing, or
>>>>>   is that something I should investigate?
>>>>>
>>>>>   —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
>>>>>   Language is froth on the surface of thought. — John McCarthyte