[elephant-devel] Updated version of last Postmodern patch bundle

[Ian Eslick]

I pulled a fresh copy of the current head and I found one issue:

Mac OS X / Allegro / BDB 4.5 - no probs
Mac OS X / Allegro / CLSQL - map-index-remove failed
Mac OS X / SBCL / BDB 4.5 - no probs
Mac OS X / SBCL / CLSQL - no probs

(I don't have a postgres test db setup at the moment)

Ian

On Mar 16, 2008, at 3:15 PM, Robert L. Read wrote:

> Dear Leslie and Ian Alex and Henrik,
> 	I can see now that I did not apply Leslie's updated patch.  I  
> attempted
> to rollback and reapply the correct patch.  Unfortunately, I was  
> unable
> to get to a "green" state under any system.  I find darcs much  
> harder to
> work with than CVS (however, I had a great deal of experience with  
> CVS.)
>
> 	So, unfortunately, Leslie, I cannot re-apply our patch.  If you have
> working code, please compute another patch directly against the  
> CURRENT
> tip of the main development branch in the repository.  I will then  
> apply
> this and see if I can get to green.
>
> 	Furthermore, in attempt to solve this problem, I restored my local  
> copy
> to the head of the main repository, and am green only under BDB.
>
> 	I'm afraid things have gotten a little out of control, although I  
> think
> we are using proper discipline and committing things only when we are
> green on the local systems that we can test on.  However, I would like
> to get the main repository back to a "known working" state for my
> systems (SBCL, BDB, Postgres, Postmodern, X86 architecture.)
> 	
> 	I think the best way to do this is for Leslie to get green and send  
> me
> a diff; if I still have problems after that I may have to look into
> Ian's checkins.  As a last resort we can rollback patches until we get
> to something working...but that is a last resort.
>
> 	If I can't get things worked out after Leslie sends me the patch,  
> then
> I may have to ask you guys to test against the head and send me your
> results on your systems.
>
> 	Ian wants to make a release in a few weeks, and we really need to get
> back to a solid state ahead of that.
>
>
>
> On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 12:23 +0100, Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
>> Dear Robert,
>>
>> I posted an updated version of the patch shortly after, and it seems
>> you applied the obsolete one. Can you check?
>>
>>
>>> 	I did personally have some problems...perhaps because Bordeaux  
>>> Threads
>>> is not claiming to work on x86_64 architectures, darn it!
>>
>> Hrm, I guess it should just be a thin compatibility layer for SBCL.
>> Does SBCL officially support threading on ia64?
>>
>>
>>> 	So the upshot is that I am green under BDB and postmodern with your
>>> changes, except for your test itself, which fails for me on sbcl  
>>> 1.0.13
>>> on an x86_64, apparently more because of the threading than the
>>> reapoing.
>>
>> I will look into this when we have sorted out the patch problem.
>>
>>  Leslie
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> elephant-devel site list
>> elephant-devel at common-lisp.net
>> http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> elephant-devel site list
> elephant-devel at common-lisp.net
> http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel