Attached find update for port of cmucl to version 19e Fix: Patch attached with submission follows:
Maintainer of lang/cmucl, Please note that PR ports/126890 has just been submitted. If it contains a patch for an upgrade, an enhancement or a bug fix you agree on, reply to this email stating that you approve the patch and a committer will take care of it. The full text of the PR can be found at: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/126890 -- Edwin Groothuis via the GNATS Auto Assign Tool edwin@FreeBSD.org
State Changed From-To: open->feedback Awaiting maintainers feedback (via the GNATS Auto Assign Tool)
State Changed From-To: feedback->open maintainer timeout
proposed patch looks good. Committer needs to make sure the recent fix nor NOPORTS doc (see last commit) doesn't get nuked. -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/
Hi Fulvio, could you please re-send your update as a patch in unified diff format (as produced by 'diff -u') against the current version of the port? Thanks and regards, Stefan
At Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:12:56 +0100, Stefan Walter wrote: > > Hi Fulvio, > > could you please re-send your update as a patch in unified diff format (as > produced by 'diff -u') against the current version of the port? > > Thanks and regards, > Stefan
Hi Fulvio, hi Martin, I have corrected the plist so the NOPORTDOCS changes Martin mentioned weren't lost. However, it doesn't fetch: - On FreeBSD 7-STABLE: ### => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd7.1.tar.bz2 is not in /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo. => Either /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo is out of date, or => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd7.1.tar.bz2 is spelled incorrectly. *** Error code 1 Stop in /a/ports/lang/cmucl. ### - On FreeBSD 6.4: ### => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd6.4.tar.bz2 is not in /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo. => Either /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo is out of date, or => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd6.4.tar.bz2 is spelled incorrectly. *** Error code 1 Stop in /a/ports/lang/cmucl. ### This is a result of ${OSREL}, which is used in ${DISTNAME} in the Makefile, having different values on different releases, of course. Regards, Stefan
This is because only cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd{6.3,7.0,8.0}.tar.bz2 is found on the site. How should one deal with this? Fulvio At Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:54:51 +0100, Stefan Walter wrote: > > Hi Fulvio, hi Martin, > > I have corrected the plist so the NOPORTDOCS changes Martin mentioned > weren't lost. However, it doesn't fetch: > > - On FreeBSD 7-STABLE: > > ### > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd7.1.tar.bz2 is not in /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo. > => Either /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo is out of date, or > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd7.1.tar.bz2 is spelled incorrectly. > *** Error code 1 > > Stop in /a/ports/lang/cmucl. > ### > > - On FreeBSD 6.4: > > ### > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd6.4.tar.bz2 is not in /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo. > => Either /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo is out of date, or > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd6.4.tar.bz2 is spelled incorrectly. > *** Error code 1 > > Stop in /a/ports/lang/cmucl. > ### > > This is a result of ${OSREL}, which is used in ${DISTNAME} in the > Makefile, having different values on different releases, of course. > > Regards, > Stefan
Fulvio Ciriaco, 15.12.08, 21:13h CET: > This is because only cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd{6.3,7.0,8.0}.tar.bz2 is found on the > site. > How should one deal with this? I assume that the 6.3 version will work on 6.4 as well, and the 7.0 version will work on 7.1 etc. If that's the case, check ${OSVERSION} and set DISTNAME accordingly. Untested example: ### .if ${OSVERSION} >= 800000 || defined(FETCH_ALL) DISTNAME+= ${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}-x86-freebsd8.0 .endif .if ${OSVERSION} >= 700055 && ${OSVERSION} < 800000 || defined(FETCH_ALL) DISTNAME+= ${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}-x86-freebsd7.0 .endif .if ${OSVERSION} >= 603000 && ${OSVERSION} < 700055 || defined(FETCH_ALL) DISTNAME+= ${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}-x86-freebsd6.3 .endif .if ${OSVERSION} < 603000 IGNORE= Works only on system >= 6.3-RELEASE .endif ### With the check for FETCH_ALL you can execute "make makesum FETCH_ALL=yes" and it will generate distinfo entries for all three files (which is required). Also see [1] and [2] in the porter's handbook for details. Regards, Stefan [1]: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/dads-after-port-mk.html [2]: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/freebsd-versions.html
Fulvio Ciriaco wrote on Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 09:13:38PM +0100: > This is because only cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd{6.3,7.0,8.0}.tar.bz2 is found on the > site. The 6.3 build will work on the newer OSes, too, but it would be better to pick more selectively. I think we should set symlinks in the CMUCL download dirs for all FreeBSD versions, but that's gonna get out of date. if you want a Pick whatever is the newest but not newer than the OS. E.g. OS is 6.4, binaries available are 6.3 and 6.5, use 6.3. But e.g. OS is 6.3, binaries available are 6.4 and 5.3, use 5.3. I think just using <= (mayor*10+minor) will do. But the trouble is in walking the download dir first. Martin > How should one deal with this? > Fulvio > > At Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:54:51 +0100, > Stefan Walter wrote: > > > > Hi Fulvio, hi Martin, > > > > I have corrected the plist so the NOPORTDOCS changes Martin mentioned > > weren't lost. However, it doesn't fetch: > > > > - On FreeBSD 7-STABLE: > > > > ### > > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd7.1.tar.bz2 is not in /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo. > > => Either /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo is out of date, or > > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd7.1.tar.bz2 is spelled incorrectly. > > *** Error code 1 > > > > Stop in /a/ports/lang/cmucl. > > ### > > > > - On FreeBSD 6.4: > > > > ### > > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd6.4.tar.bz2 is not in /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo. > > => Either /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo is out of date, or > > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd6.4.tar.bz2 is spelled incorrectly. > > *** Error code 1 > > > > Stop in /a/ports/lang/cmucl. > > ### > > > > This is a result of ${OSREL}, which is used in ${DISTNAME} in the > > Makefile, having different values on different releases, of course. > > > > Regards, > > Stefan -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/
I have been using cmucl-freebsd-7.0 on freebsd7.0 and 7.1 without any problem. However I have no 6.x or 8.0 platform to test. My prudential logic is: if (OS>=7.0) then install cmucl-19e- else install cmucl-19c- I think who sticks with FreeBSD-6.x prefers cmucl with a longer testing history. Those having 7.x prefer to keep uptodate, moreover this case was tested at least by me. Fulvio At Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:42:27 -0500, Martin Cracauer wrote: > > Fulvio Ciriaco wrote on Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 09:13:38PM +0100: > > This is because only cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd{6.3,7.0,8.0}.tar.bz2 is found on the > > site. > > The 6.3 build will work on the newer OSes, too, but it would be better > to pick more selectively. > > I think we should set symlinks in the CMUCL download dirs for all > FreeBSD versions, but that's gonna get out of date. > > > if you want a > > Pick whatever is the newest but not newer than the OS. > > E.g. OS is 6.4, binaries available are 6.3 and 6.5, use 6.3. > > But e.g. OS is 6.3, binaries available are 6.4 and 5.3, use 5.3. > > I think just using <= (mayor*10+minor) will do. But the trouble is in > walking the download dir first. > > Martin > > > How should one deal with this? > > Fulvio > > > > At Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:54:51 +0100, > > Stefan Walter wrote: > > > > > > Hi Fulvio, hi Martin, > > > > > > I have corrected the plist so the NOPORTDOCS changes Martin mentioned > > > weren't lost. However, it doesn't fetch: > > > > > > - On FreeBSD 7-STABLE: > > > > > > ### > > > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd7.1.tar.bz2 is not in /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo. > > > => Either /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo is out of date, or > > > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd7.1.tar.bz2 is spelled incorrectly. > > > *** Error code 1 > > > > > > Stop in /a/ports/lang/cmucl. > > > ### > > > > > > - On FreeBSD 6.4: > > > > > > ### > > > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd6.4.tar.bz2 is not in /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo. > > > => Either /a/ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo is out of date, or > > > => cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd6.4.tar.bz2 is spelled incorrectly. > > > *** Error code 1 > > > > > > Stop in /a/ports/lang/cmucl. > > > ### > > > > > > This is a result of ${OSREL}, which is used in ${DISTNAME} in the > > > Makefile, having different values on different releases, of course. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Stefan > > -- > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ > FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/
,--- Martin Cracauer (Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:00:04 GMT) ----* | The 6.3 build will work on the newer OSes, too, but it would be better | to pick more selectively. `--------------------------------------------------------* Not out of the box -- compatibility libraries would be required. ,--- Stefan Walter (Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:10:08 GMT) ----* | I assume that the 6.3 version will work on 6.4 as well, and the 7.0 | version will work on 7.1 etc. If that's the case, check ${OSVERSION} and | set DISTNAME accordingly. Untested example: `------------------------------------------------------* The assumption is reasonable but there is no guarantee. ,--- Fulvio Ciriaco (Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:30:05 GMT) ----* | I have been using cmucl-freebsd-7.0 on freebsd7.0 and 7.1 without | any problem. | However I have no 6.x or 8.0 platform to test. | My prudential logic is: | if (OS>=7.0) then install cmucl-19e- | else install cmucl-19c- | I think who sticks with FreeBSD-6.x prefers cmucl with a longer testing | history. Those having 7.x prefer to keep uptodate, moreover this case | was tested at least by me. `-------------------------------------------------------* 19e is good on FreeBSD-6.x -- at least on whatever "x" it was build, as reflected in the distribution's name. There is no point in sticking with 19c -- if you hit a problem there, there will be hardly any rush to fix it until the problem is reproduced in the newest distribution. Now, about the "newest". Even 19e is old by certain metric: it was released on May 4 2008, and since then lots of progress has been made, which is reflected in monthly snapshots, the latest being 2008-12, released on Dec 10. The way CMUCL progresses, if one wants the best CMUCL available, the latest snapshot should be the best choice. I am saying this with a certain degree of confidence, as a the person who builds FreeBSD CMUCL distributions available at common-lisp.net. As such, I also know that: * I am not planning to build on FreeBSD 6 anymore -- the last build for FreeBSD 6.3 was 2008-11. * I may or may not keep up with the FreeBSD 8 -- there is no 2008-12 distribution for it, as I was not able to rebuild the OS itself (although I'll be trying every month). * The moment RELENG_7 switches to FreeBSD 7.1, the 7.x distributions will be tagged with 7.1: I want the distributions to be explicit about the platform they were built and tested on. From that point on, I will not be able to claim "tested on 7.0". So, the situation with CMUCLs is somewhat complicated, and personally I would always prefer to go to http://common-lisp.net and pull the latest suitable snapshot from there. With this in mind, I had decided to refrain from volunteering to maintain the FreeBSD `lang/cmucl' port, even though I do maintain another one: essentially, if you want CMUCL, go where it is, that is to the primary source. You may want to keep this all in mind. -- Alex -- alex-goncharov@comcast.net --
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->stefan Take.
Stefan Walter wrote on Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 04:03:19PM +0100: > Fulvio Ciriaco, 15.12.08, 21:13h CET: > > > This is because only cmucl-19e-x86-freebsd{6.3,7.0,8.0}.tar.bz2 is found on the > > site. > > How should one deal with this? > > I assume that the 6.3 version will work on 6.4 as well, and the 7.0 > version will work on 7.1 etc. If that's the case, check ${OSVERSION} and > set DISTNAME accordingly. Untested example: > > ### > .if ${OSVERSION} >= 800000 || defined(FETCH_ALL) > DISTNAME+= ${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}-x86-freebsd8.0 > .endif > .if ${OSVERSION} >= 700055 && ${OSVERSION} < 800000 || defined(FETCH_ALL) > DISTNAME+= ${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}-x86-freebsd7.0 > .endif > .if ${OSVERSION} >= 603000 && ${OSVERSION} < 700055 || defined(FETCH_ALL) > DISTNAME+= ${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}-x86-freebsd6.3 > .endif > .if ${OSVERSION} < 603000 > IGNORE= Works only on system >= 6.3-RELEASE > .endif > ### I can't find the right sequence of .include <bsd.port.pre.mk> and the above to make it fetch the right files. I verified that the 6.3 build works even on 8.0-amd64. I think we should commit a simple update to 19e first and then make a revision. Martin > With the check for FETCH_ALL you can execute "make makesum FETCH_ALL=yes" > and it will generate distinfo entries for all three files (which is > required). > > Also see [1] and [2] in the porter's handbook for details. > > Regards, > Stefan > > [1]: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/dads-after-port-mk.html > [2]: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/freebsd-versions.html -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/
Martin Cracauer, 23.12.08, 17:37h CET: > I verified that the 6.3 build works even on 8.0-amd64. I think we > should commit a simple update to 19e first and then make a revision. OK. Can you (Martin or Fulvio) send a patch with the intended changes for the update? Regards, Stefan
Stefan Walter wrote on Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 10:07:20PM +0100: > Martin Cracauer, 23.12.08, 17:37h CET: > > > I verified that the 6.3 build works even on 8.0-amd64. I think we > > should commit a simple update to 19e first and then make a revision. > > OK. Can you (Martin or Fulvio) send a patch with the intended changes for > the update? I did not make a patch with the version switch mechanism. What I did is just use the 6.3 build everywhere. Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/
Martin Cracauer, 08.01.09, 00:44h CET: > Stefan Walter wrote on Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 10:07:20PM +0100: > > Martin Cracauer, 23.12.08, 17:37h CET: > > > > > I verified that the 6.3 build works even on 8.0-amd64. I think we > > > should commit a simple update to 19e first and then make a revision. > > > > OK. Can you (Martin or Fulvio) send a patch with the intended changes for > > the update? > > I did not make a patch with the version switch mechanism. > > What I did is just use the 6.3 build everywhere. Yep, I understood that. ;-) What I meant was that someone would have to send a followup with a patch for your proposed update to the 6.3 build of 19e so that I can test and commit it. Regards, Stefan
Stefan Walter wrote on Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 11:19:05AM +0100: > Martin Cracauer, 08.01.09, 00:44h CET: > > > Stefan Walter wrote on Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 10:07:20PM +0100: > > > Martin Cracauer, 23.12.08, 17:37h CET: > > > > > > > I verified that the 6.3 build works even on 8.0-amd64. I think we > > > > should commit a simple update to 19e first and then make a revision. > > > > > > OK. Can you (Martin or Fulvio) send a patch with the intended changes for > > > the update? > > > > I did not make a patch with the version switch mechanism. > > > > What I did is just use the 6.3 build everywhere. > > Yep, I understood that. ;-) What I meant was that someone would have to > send a followup with a patch for your proposed update to the 6.3 build of > 19e so that I can test and commit it. Appended. I tested this in 7-stable/i386 and 8-current/amd64. I got my commit bit back and a mentor for port messes like the selection mechanism we discussed. Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/
stefan 2009-01-08 18:44:19 UTC FreeBSD ports repository Modified files: lang/cmucl Makefile distinfo pkg-plist Log: Update to 19e. PR: 126890 Submitted by: fulvio ciriaco <oivulf@gmail.com> Patch by: maintainer Revision Changes Path 1.33 +2 -2 ports/lang/cmucl/Makefile 1.13 +3 -3 ports/lang/cmucl/distinfo 1.14 +6 -1 ports/lang/cmucl/pkg-plist _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "cvs-all-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Martin Cracauer, 08.01.09, 18:21h CET: > > > > OK. Can you (Martin or Fulvio) send a patch with the intended changes for > > > > the update? > > > > > > I did not make a patch with the version switch mechanism. > > > > > > What I did is just use the 6.3 build everywhere. > > > > Yep, I understood that. ;-) What I meant was that someone would have to > > send a followup with a patch for your proposed update to the 6.3 build of > > 19e so that I can test and commit it. > > Appended. I tested this in 7-stable/i386 and 8-current/amd64. OK, thanks! I just committed it (with a couple of fixes to pkg-plist.) > I got my commit bit back and a mentor for port messes like the > selection mechanism we discussed. Great - welcome back! Regards, Stefan
State Changed From-To: open->closed Port updated, thanks!