Faré writes:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Daniel Kochmański
> wrote:
>> In fact I did, but it didn't work, so I've tried the testcase you
>> provided with the same result, so I've wrote an e-mail.
>>
>> I had to manually quickload the reader-interception, because it's not
>> listed in the
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Daniel Kochmański
wrote:
> In fact I did, but it didn't work, so I've tried the testcase you
> provided with the same result, so I've wrote an e-mail.
>
> I had to manually quickload the reader-interception, because it's not
> listed in the lil/test dependencies.
In fact I did, but it didn't work, so I've tried the testcase you
provided with the same result, so I've wrote an e-mail.
I had to manually quickload the reader-interception, because it's not
listed in the lil/test dependencies. I think it's a lil's test system
definition bug.
Either way, testing
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 1:28 AM, Daniel Kochmański wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I have on this testcase:
>
> jack@pandora ~ % rlwrap ecl -eval "'(#.(require \"asdf\")#.(asdf:test-system
> :lil))"
> ;;; Loading "/home/jack/quicklisp/setup.lisp"
> ;;; Loading #P"/usr/local/lib/ecl-16.1.2/asdf.fas"
> An error
Hey,
I have on this testcase:
jack@pandora ~ % rlwrap ecl -eval "'(#.(require \"asdf\")#.(asdf:test-system
:lil))"
;;; Loading "/home/jack/quicklisp/setup.lisp"
;;; Loading #P"/usr/local/lib/ecl-16.1.2/asdf.fas"
An error occurred during initialization:
Component "reader-interception" not found,
lil passes all tests for me on sbcl, ccl, allegro, clisp, but on ecl I get:
Condition of type: SEGMENTATION-VIOLATION
Detected access to an invalid or protected memory address.
Which precise test causes the segfault varies at each try.
To reproduce:
rlwrap ecl -eval "'(#.(require \"asdf\")#.(as
