Re: Bug#1086128: src:sbcl: fails to migrate to testing for too long

[Sean Whitton]

Hello,

On Sat 21 Dec 2024 at 03:34pm +01, Paul Gevers wrote:

> How severe do you think this error is? Does it indicate that sbcl is
> useless on ppc64el or is this a niche use case?

I would doubt that it means that sbcl is useless on ppc64el because of
how upstream can't reproduce the problem.

> Removal of sbcl on ppc64el seems to be going to be non-trivial as it's a key
> package via cl-cffi which is needed for brltty which is very important for our
> accessibility support (pulled in via d-i if I'm not mistaken).

An alternative would just be to downgrade sbcl with a +really version.

-- 
Sean Whitton


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#1086128: src:sbcl: fails to migrate to testing for too long

[Paul Gevers]

Dear ppc64el porters: ping.

Dear Sean,

On 02-12-2024 07:38, Paul Gevers wrote:

On 12/2/24 03:36, Sean Whitton wrote:

I don't think I can do anything about this bug.  Upstream aren't able to
reproduce it.  I don't think it makes sense to block sbcl's migration on
this.  I think that either we should ignore the cl-ironclad test failure
on ppc64el or remove sbcl on that architecture, if you think that would
be warranted.


cl-ironclad *and* cl-postmodern. And the error is identical:
no size function for object at 0x19bf80 (widetag 0x33)


How severe do you think this error is? Does it indicate that sbcl is 
useless on ppc64el or is this a niche use case?


Removal of sbcl on ppc64el seems to be going to be non-trivial as it's a 
key package via cl-cffi which is needed for brltty which is very 
important for our accessibility support (pulled in via d-i if I'm not 
mistaken).


Paul



OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature