Andras Simon <asimon@...> writes:
> Juho Snellman <jsnell@...> writes:
> > Andras Simon <asimon@...> writes:
> > > (Meanwhile, I've downloaded the 0.9.17 binary from sf and it seems to
> > > run fine. Should I try to compile sbcl with it?)
> > I wouldn't expect that to make any difference. But can you run the
> Compiling with sbcl worked, so I thought it did make a difference.
> But then...
> > following tests, and report which ones work?
> > src/runtime/sbcl --core output/cold-sbcl.core --no-userinit
> > (defun sb!impl::profile-deinit ())
> > (save-lisp-and-die "foo.core")
> > And:
> > src/runtime/sbcl --core foo.core --no-userinit
> > And:
> > src/runtime/sbcl --core output/sbcl.core --no-userinit
> ...I recompiled with cmucl to be able to run these tests, and this
> time it went without a hitch. (I didn't update the sources in the
> meantime.) I'll try it again, and will run the tests if there is a
Still no problem after several recompilations. Except that running
sh ./run-tests.sh produces this:
Finished running tests.
Expected failure: debug.impure.lisp / (UNDEFINED-FUNCTION BUG-353)
Unexpected success: debug.impure.lisp / (THROW NO-SUCH-TAG)
Unexpected success: debug.impure.lisp / (BACKTRACE MISC)
Expected failure: external-format.impure.lisp /
Failure: timer.impure.lisp / (WITH-TIMEOUT MANY-AT-THE-SAME-TIME)
test failed, expected 104 return code, got 1
I guess it's unrelated, but I thought I'd mention it.