On 2/4/15 7:59 PM, Sean Lake wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Whenever sbcl gets upgraded I rebuild maxima and xmaxima to make sure they’ll
> run bug free. The rebuild of maxima and xmaxima failed this time:
>
> Can't resolve dependency "sbcl (=1.2.7-1)" for package "maxima-5.35.1-2" (no
> matching package
Hello all,
Whenever sbcl gets upgraded I rebuild maxima and xmaxima to make sure they’ll
run bug free. The rebuild of maxima and xmaxima failed this time:
Can't resolve dependency "sbcl (=1.2.7-1)" for package "maxima-5.35.1-2" (no
matching packages/versions found)
Thanks,
Sean Lake
fink --ver
Thanks. That worked. :)
On Aug 15, 2013, at 9:03 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> I just fixed this: when I sync'ed the 10.7 tree package description over I
> missed merging the Source-MD5 field for the i386 packaging. Sorry about that.
>
> As a workaround, use "fink fetch sbcl", then select opti
I just fixed this: when I sync'ed the 10.7 tree package description
over I missed merging the Source-MD5 field for the i386 packaging.
Sorry about that.
As a workaround, use "fink fetch sbcl", then select option 1) when it
complains. After that, use "fink install sbcl" and select the "Use the
After it tries different mirror sites, then it fails with checksum error.
Thanks for answering.
On Aug 15, 2013, at 3:59 AM, Jesse Alama wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Thanks for the feedback! It seems there's a checksum error with SBCL 1.1.10.
> Does the build process fails right away?
>
> Jesse
>
Hi Sean, Alex,
I think I'm the root of the problem here -- I recently submitted an updated
SBCL, bumping the version from 1.0.33 to 1.0.34, without corresponding with
Alexander Hansen. I was quick to submit an update to SBCL because of an
packaging problem with SBLC unrelated to (x)maxima.
Je
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Hi Sean, Alex,
>
> I think I'm the root of the problem here -- I recently submitted an updated
> SBCL, bumping the version from 1.0.33 to 1.0.34, without corresponding with
> Alexander Hansen. I was quick to submit an update to SBCL because of an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Hello all,
>
> I've grown accustomed to the less than elegant way in which I have to
> manually purge, rebuild, and reinstall maxima every time sbcl gets updated,
> but it appears that this time the process failed.
>
If you've got a better way
Hello all,
I've grown accustomed to the less than elegant way in which I have to manually
purge, rebuild, and reinstall maxima every time sbcl gets updated, but it
appears that this time the process failed.
I just updated and installed the new sbcl and now maxima refuses to build.
Technical
On 30 Jan 2009, at 06:26, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> How should we implement this in the package description from the
> tracker?
My previous msg was chiefly to encourage the maintainers to raise the
(three) bootstrapping issues upstream..
It seems more than likely to be harmless, IMHO,
so tha
Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
> On 28 Jan 2009, at 03:34, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
>>> It is OK _ modulo fixing the Source2-MD5 to
>> 3b222a1f945ca462a2884fc378362c33
>
> Still a small problem _ a paranoiac might want do a second build,
> with as bootstrap binary that of the first _:
> after
On 28 Jan 2009, at 03:34, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>> It is OK _ modulo fixing the Source2-MD5 to
> 3b222a1f945ca462a2884fc378362c33
Still a small problem _ a paranoiac might want do a second build,
with as bootstrap binary that of the first _:
after the initial build I get 25595932 as size
On 27 Jan 2009, at 23:24, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> Jesse Alama wrote:
>> Jean-François Mertens writes:
>>
>>
>>> On 27 Jan 2009, at 16:38, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>>>
>>>
I'll redirect this on to the sbcl-intel maintainer. When we tried
just
copying/modifying the powerpc package
Jesse Alama wrote:
> Jean-François Mertens writes:
>
>
>> On 27 Jan 2009, at 16:38, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I'll redirect this on to the sbcl-intel maintainer. When we tried
>>> just
>>> copying/modifying the powerpc package description for the prior
>>> version
>>> of the p
Jean-François Mertens writes:
> On 27 Jan 2009, at 16:38, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
>> I'll redirect this on to the sbcl-intel maintainer. When we tried
>> just
>> copying/modifying the powerpc package description for the prior
>> version
>> of the package, a problem apparently showed up.
>
On 27 Jan 2009, at 16:38, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> I'll redirect this on to the sbcl-intel maintainer. When we tried
> just
> copying/modifying the powerpc package description for the prior
> version
> of the package, a problem apparently showed up.
In particular, in Source2, "powerpc" -->
Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
> On 27 Jan 2009, at 07:22, Moritz Kaiser wrote:
>
>> Alexander Hansen schrieb:
>>> Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>>>
On 20 Jan 2009, at 21:44, Alexander Hansen wrote:
[...]
> I'd also like to see about updating the Intel version to match;
>
On 27 Jan 2009, at 07:22, Moritz Kaiser wrote:
> Alexander Hansen schrieb:
>> Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>>
>>> On 20 Jan 2009, at 21:44, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
I'd also like to see about updating the Intel version to match;
>>> Of course. Should just involve versio
It was updated a while ago.
On Jan 27, 2009, at 1:22 AM, Moritz Kaiser wrote:
> Alexander Hansen schrieb:
>> Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>>
>>> On 20 Jan 2009, at 21:44, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
I'd also like to see about updating the Intel version to match;
>>> Of cou
Alexander Hansen schrieb:
> Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
>> On 20 Jan 2009, at 21:44, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> I'd also like to see about updating the Intel version to match;
>>>
>> Of course. Should just involve version changes
>> (tomorrow I may get my intel bac
Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
> On 20 Jan 2009, at 21:44, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
>> Before anybody commits this, we should verify that it does indeed build
>> on 10.4;
> It does.
>> and maxima has to be updated concurrently.
> Sure. (maxima builds and works fine with it)
> Best you do the commi
On 20 Jan 2009, at 21:44, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> Before anybody commits this, we should verify that it does indeed
> build
> on 10.4;
It does.
> and maxima has to be updated concurrently.
Sure. (maxima builds and works fine with it)
Best you do the commit, as maintainer of maxima,
to make su
Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
> On 20 Jan 2009, at 21:44, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
>> Before anybody commits this, we should verify that it does indeed build
>> on 10.4;
> It does.
>> and maxima has to be updated concurrently.
> Sure. (maxima builds and works fine with it)
> Best you do the commi
Leigh Smith wrote:
> Attached is the latest sbcl-powerpc.info that I've confirmed builds on
> 10.5.6 on a PowerBook G4 ok. From all of your previous reports, it
> should build on 10.4.11 correctly also.
>
>
>
>
> Leigh
> --
> Leigh M. Smith
> mailto:le...@leighsmith.com
> http://www.leighsmith.com
Attached is the latest sbcl-powerpc.info that I've confirmed builds on
10.5.6 on a PowerBook G4 ok. From all of your previous reports, it
should build on 10.4.11 correctly also.
sbcl-powerpc.info
Description: Binary data
Leigh
--
Leigh M. Smith
mailto:le...@leighsmith.com
http://www.lei
On 19 Jan 2009, at 16:37, Leigh Smith wrote:
> Perhaps my email of Jan 16th didn't get through:
I see .. Sorry.
JF
--
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http:
Perhaps my email of Jan 16th didn't get through:
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Leigh Smith
>> Date: 16 January 2009 12:20:17 PM
>> To: Martin Costabel
>> Cc: Jean-François Mertens , Fink Users
>> > >, Alexander Hansen , Sean Lake
>> >> >, Sebastián González
>> Subject: Re: sbcl Compil
On 16 Jan 2009, at 09:40, Leigh Smith wrote:
> I've attached a new sbcl-powerpc.info which builds sbcl 1.0.24 on
> PowerPC MacOS 10.5.6 with gcc 4.0.1
>
> Send me the error log if it doesn't build on 10.4.11 and Xcode 2.5
Didn't even try, since it uses the same 1.0.22 binary that we know is
ok, thanks for the clarification. As I alluded to in my previous
message, the PPC binary 1.0.22 does run on 10.5. One of the most
recent changes of 1.0.24 is to allow binaries to run on both 10.4 &
10.5, so the final solution is to get a 1.0.24 binary posted onto
sourceforge so that we don'
I've attached a new sbcl-powerpc.info which builds sbcl 1.0.24 on
PowerPC MacOS 10.5.6 with gcc 4.0.1
Send me the error log if it doesn't build on 10.4.11 and Xcode 2.5
sbcl-powerpc.info
Description: Binary data
Leigh
--
Leigh M. Smith
mailto:le...@leighsmith.com
http://www.leighsmith.c
Leigh Smith wrote:
> I've attached a new sbcl-powerpc.info which builds sbcl 1.0.24 on
> PowerPC MacOS 10.5.6 with gcc 4.0.1
>
> Send me the error log if it doesn't build on 10.4.11 and Xcode 2.5
It crashes in exactly the same way as before. This is not surprising,
because the crash comes from
I had the same problem.
In addition, trying to bootstrap instead from
clisp or from openmcl both failed too.
So I had to bootstrap from the existing sbcl binary;
the following fix will get users who have already
some sbcl installed off the hook :
diff -r1.11 sbcl-powerpc.info
26,27c26,27
< sh m
Hi all,
Unfortunately I no longer have access to PPC machines. For this
reason, I asked Leigh Smith some time ago whether he would care to
become the maintainer of the package. He has kindly accepted this
invitation (his main machine is an Intel but he still has a G4 at hand).
Once the ne
I'll see if I can build SBCL 1.0.24 on PPC tonight and if so, I'll
prepare some .info files for updating the fink unstable distribution.
> Hi all,
>
> Unfortunately I no longer have access to PPC machines. For this
> reason, I asked Leigh Smith some time ago whether he would care to
> becom
Sean Lake wrote:
[]
>>> Thread 0 Crashed:
>>> 0 libSystem.B.dylib 0x9012cab0 _malloc_initialize + 1016
>>> 1 libSystem.B.dylib 0x90002fb8 malloc + 48
>>> 2 sbcl0xa9bc successful_malloc + 28
>>> 3 sbcl0xaa10 copied_string + 32
>>> 4 sbcl
On Jan 14, 2009, at 3:08 AM, Martin Costabel wrote:
> Alexander Hansen wrote:
> []
/$*=./local-target-features.lisp-expr ./contrib/sb-bsd-sockets/
foo.c
./contrib/sb-posix/foo.c ./src/runtime/target-arch-os.h
./src/runtime/target-arch.h ./src/runtime/target-lispregs.h
./
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 12:08 AM, Martin Costabel wrote:
> Alexander Hansen wrote:
> []
/$*=./local-target-features.lisp-expr ./contrib/sb-bsd-sockets/foo.c
./contrib/sb-posix/foo.c ./src/runtime/target-arch-os.h
./src/runtime/target-arch.h ./src/runtime/target-lispregs.h
Alexander Hansen wrote:
[]
>>> /$*=./local-target-features.lisp-expr ./contrib/sb-bsd-sockets/foo.c
>>> ./contrib/sb-posix/foo.c ./src/runtime/target-arch-os.h
>>> ./src/runtime/target-arch.h ./src/runtime/target-lispregs.h
>>> ./src/runtime/target-os.h
>>> /$scratchfilename=/tmp/canonicalize-white
On Jan 13, 2009, at 10:40 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
> On Jan 13, 2009, at 10:14 PM, Sean Lake wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> sbcl version 1.0.23-2 is failing to build. The error is:
>>
>> /$*=./local-target-features.lisp-expr ./contrib/sb-bsd-sockets/foo.c
>> ./contrib/sb-posix/foo.c ./src/runt
On Jan 13, 2009, at 10:14 PM, Sean Lake wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> sbcl version 1.0.23-2 is failing to build. The error is:
>
> /$*=./local-target-features.lisp-expr ./contrib/sb-bsd-sockets/foo.c
> ./contrib/sb-posix/foo.c ./src/runtime/target-arch-os.h
> ./src/runtime/target-arch.h ./src/runtime/t
Hello all,
sbcl version 1.0.23-2 is failing to build. The error is:
/$*=./local-target-features.lisp-expr ./contrib/sb-bsd-sockets/foo.c
./contrib/sb-posix/foo.c ./src/runtime/target-arch-os.h
./src/runtime/target-arch.h ./src/runtime/target-lispregs.h
./src/runtime/target-os.h
/$scratchfilename=
Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
> On Friday 25 January 2008 12:50:09 pm Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
>
>> Mark J. Reed wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 23, 2008 4:13 AM, Normen Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>> wrote:
>>
Dear all,
I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X
On Friday 25 January 2008 12:50:09 pm Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
> Mark J. Reed wrote:
> > On Jan 23, 2008 4:13 AM, Normen Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1.
> >
> > While waiting for fink to catch up, I not
Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2008 4:13 AM, Normen MÃŒller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1.
>>
>
> While waiting for fink to catch up, I note that MacPorts has sbcl
> 1.0.13 working on 10.5.1:
>
> (0)wazowski> sbcl
Sorry I didn't see that. When I did sudo port sbcl I got the 1.0.13
On Jan 25, 2008, at 1:10 PM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On Jan 25, 2008 4:07 PM, Richard E. Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Just type sudo port install sbcl
>
> Should take this offlist, as it's not on-topic for a fink list...
On Jan 25, 2008 4:07 PM, Richard E. Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just type sudo port install sbcl
Should take this offlist, as it's not on-topic for a fink list...
But how to install it wasn't Normen's issue; he got that far. His
concern was that the version he saw was 1.0.12 whereas the o
Just type sudo port install sbcl
On Jan 25, 2008, at 11:05 AM, Normen Müller wrote:
> Mark J. Reed wrote:
>> On Jan 23, 2008 4:13 AM, Normen Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1.
>>>
>>
>> While waiting for fin
Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2008 4:13 AM, Normen Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1.
>>
>
> While waiting for fink to catch up, I note that MacPorts has sbcl
> 1.0.13 working on 10.5.1:
>
> (0)wazowski> sbcl
Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2008 4:13 AM, Normen Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1.
>
> While waiting for fink to catch up, I note that MacPorts has sbcl
> 1.0.13 working on 10.5.1:
>
> (0)wazowski> sbcl
> Th
On Jan 25, 2008 11:55 AM, Alexander Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A word of caution: be careful when building packages in such cases.
> You can wind up with Macports packages linking to Fink libraries, and
> vice versa. This can cause problems for you down the road when you
> change things
Normen Mueller wrote:
> Mark J. Reed wrote:
>
>> On Jan 23, 2008 4:13 AM, Normen MÃŒller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1.
>>>
>>>
>> While waiting for fink to catch up, I note that MacPorts has s
Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2008 4:13 AM, Normen MÃŒller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1.
>>
>
> While waiting for fink to catch up, I note that MacPorts has sbcl
> 1.0.13 working on 10.5.1:
>
> (0)wazowski> sbcl
On Jan 23, 2008 4:13 AM, Normen Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1.
While waiting for fink to catch up, I note that MacPorts has sbcl
1.0.13 working on 10.5.1:
(0)wazowski> sbcl
This is SBCL 1.0.13, an implementation of ANSI
On Thursday 24 January 2008 01:33:24 am you wrote:
> Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
> > On Wednesday 23 January 2008 09:58:01 Normen Müller wrote:
> >> Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday 23 January 2008 04:13:35 Normen Müller wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am still waiting to get s
On Wednesday 23 January 2008 04:13:35 Normen Müller wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1. Has no one
> any interests to get this package running? Any other suggestions?
>
> Cheers,
>/nm
>
It's available on 10.5:
http://pdb.finkproject.org/pdb/pack
Dear all,
I am still waiting to get sbcl running on Mac OS X 10.5.1. Has no one
any interests to get this package running? Any other suggestions?
Cheers,
/nm
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all cha
56 matches
Mail list logo
