SBCL blocked at 0.9.16 in testing

Thiemo Seufer ths at
Sun May 4 05:46:57 UTC 2008

Peter Van Eynde wrote:
> Hi all,
> Luca Capello wrote:
> >> Given the bootstrap problem, we should IMHO rather get SBCL going
> >> again on those architectures than ask for removal of the 0.9.16
> >> binaries from lenny.
> > 
> > Since manpower for the Debian Common Lisp Team is lacking (help is
> > always appreciated), I think that we should maintain only the
> > architectures we can provide support for.
> I fear I must agree with Luca here. Some architectures break with ease 
> and we do not have good development machines for all architectures.
> A token problem child is sparc. Before  came along 
> for a long long time there was no machine available. And some build 
> problems only seem to happen on the buildd machines :-(.

That's a reason to have proper developer machines, it is less of a
reason to drop architectures. :-)

> In fact I was certain I had created a bug asking for the removal of all 
> unsupported architectures from testing, but I cannot find this bug now. :-(
> I'll wait until the end of May. Any architectures not uploaded by 
> someone else will get removed, ok?

I re-enabled mips, mipsel, alpha and sparc again, because upstream
actively maintains them. All of them built SBCL ok, but on sparc 
the package build fails currently due to an unrelated bug in
ghostscript (#453903).

I did not enable hppa because the port is unmaintained upstream.


More information about the pkg-common-lisp-devel mailing list