Re: sbcl autopkgtest failure - missing sbcl.h (was: RFS: sbcl/2:2.2.3-1 [NMU] -- Common Lisp compiler and development system)

2022-04-05 Thread Kambiz Darabi
Hello, >> Now for the broken i386 build: make-config.sh relies on the >> result of uname -m to determine the architecture and indeed, >> the i386 build container reports x86_64: >> >> https://salsa.debian.org/darabi-guest/sbcl/-/jobs/2640765#L1327 >> >> And setting SBCL_ARCH explicitly in

cl-plus-ssl_20220328.git8b91648-3_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

2022-04-05 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2022 15:14:25 -0300 Source: cl-plus-ssl Architecture: source Version: 20220328.git8b91648-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian Common Lisp Team Changed-By: Athos Ribeiro Changes:

Processing of cl-plus-ssl_20220328.git8b91648-3_source.changes

2022-04-05 Thread Debian FTP Masters
cl-plus-ssl_20220328.git8b91648-3_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: cl-plus-ssl_20220328.git8b91648-3.dsc cl-plus-ssl_20220328.git8b91648-3.debian.tar.xz Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)

Re: sbcl autopkgtest failure - missing sbcl.h (was: RFS: sbcl/2:2.2.3-1 [NMU] -- Common Lisp compiler and development system)

2022-04-05 Thread Sébastien Villemot
Le mardi 05 avril 2022 à 11:09 +0200, Kambiz Darabi a écrit : > > Do we have the possibility of installing the sbcl-source package > > which was built during the previous pipeline build stage? > > Sorry for the noise, re-reading the docs, I found 'Depends' in > debian/tests/control and together

Re: sbcl autopkgtest failure - missing sbcl.h (was: RFS: sbcl/2:2.2.3-1 [NMU] -- Common Lisp compiler and development system)

2022-04-05 Thread Kambiz Darabi
> Do we have the possibility of installing the sbcl-source package > which was built during the previous pipeline build stage? Sorry for the noise, re-reading the docs, I found 'Depends' in debian/tests/control and together with the C_INCLUDE_PATH patch, autopkgtest is fixed:

Re: sbcl autopkgtest failure - missing sbcl.h (was: RFS: sbcl/2:2.2.3-1 [NMU] -- Common Lisp compiler and development system)

2022-04-05 Thread Sébastien Villemot
Hi Kambiz, Le mardi 05 avril 2022 à 08:48 +0200, Kambiz Darabi a écrit : > Hi Sébastien, > > > Unfortunately the autopkgtest fails, I had overlooked that problem in > > the previous iteration of our discussion. See: > > https://salsa.debian.org/common-lisp-team/sbcl/-/jobs/2624803 > > > > More

Re: sbcl autopkgtest failure - missing sbcl.h (was: RFS: sbcl/2:2.2.3-1 [NMU] -- Common Lisp compiler and development system)

2022-04-05 Thread Kambiz Darabi
Hi Sébastien, > Unfortunately the autopkgtest fails, I had overlooked that problem in > the previous iteration of our discussion. See: > https://salsa.debian.org/common-lisp-team/sbcl/-/jobs/2624803 > > More precisely, the failing test is gc-cardmark.impure.lisp, and the > error message is: > >