Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: grozin@g.o
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] dev-lisp/clozurtecl and the 17.0 profile, was: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-12-09
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2018 15:02:28
(Moving to gentoo-dev)

On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Michał Górny wrote:
> I think that if there's one package that doesn't work with profiles > (compared to the very large number of packages which just work fine), > it's not the profiles but the package being broken (read: doing silly > assumptions). Therefore, it's not 17.0 profiles being the problem but > the package in question. > > Claiming that people doing any change to Gentoo are required to fix all > the problematic packages is just silly. This is basically saying that > it's fine to add bad quality packages and then demand others to fix them > for you. People who worked on the profile can fix bugs in the profile. > Don't expect them to pursue whatever broken packages you like just > because they happened to change the fragile conditions under which they > worked.
See bug #672454. clozurecl compiles and works fine with the upstream-provided compilation flags. So, we cannot ask the upstream to solve our problems for us. clozurecl compiles and works fine (for me this means that it can compile maxima and fricas, and they work) in the 13.0 profile. In the 17.0 one, its compilation loops forever on ~x86; on ~amd64 it compiles, but does not work properly (cannot compile maxima, bug #665364). So, the reason is in the new compilation or linking flags introduced in 17.0. Is it possible to compile one specific package with compilation/linking flags closely following the 13.0 ones? How?
> That said, if you insist I'll fix this package. But I'm pretty sure you > won't like my fix.
If after this fix it will be able to compile maxima and fricas, and they will work, that would be sufficient for me. Andrey