1.8 status

1.8 status

[Greg Troxel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1725 bytes --]


I'm the maintainer for the guile entry in NetBSD pkgsrc, and am
starting to think about 1.8.   pkgsrc currently has

lang/guile14	(1.4.1, installed in /usr/pkg/guile/1.4)
lang/guile	(1.6.8, installed in /usr/pkg)

The plan would be to copy lang/guile to guile16, and install into
/usr/pkg/guile/1.6, and then update lang/guile to 1.8.x.  That way
programs that won't build with 1.8 can be pointed at 1.6 until they
do.  This was a good migration strategy for 1.4->1.6.

1.8.0 seems to now be pretty old, and a diff of the head of
branch_release-1-8 against release_1-8-0 (-Nu) gives 6088 lines, of
which 2857 are new (ignorning hierarchy.pdf).

The slib bug fix appears not to be present on the 1.8 branch, but I'm
not quite sure - it seems only to be on the 1.6 branch, and not on
HEAD.


Is it currently reasonable to use 1.8.0?  It seems there's been a lot
of work on the branch, and that probably a 1.8.1 is in order.

Here's the list of programs that use guile (1.6) in pkgsrc.  

./cad/libgeda
./databases/guile-pg
./devel/autogen
./devel/g-wrap
./devel/guile-gtk
./devel/guile-gtk
./devel/guile-lib
./devel/guile-slib
./devel/guile-www
./devel/libctl
./editors/TeXmacs
./finance/gnucash
./finance/gnucash-gtk1
./games/gnome2-games
./geography/proj-swig
./math/gnumeric
./math/guppi
./math/libmatheval
./print/lilypond
./wip/beast
./wip/guile-scsh
./wip/guilerxspencer
./textproc/tex2page
./time/gnotime
./x11/xbindkeys

Plus swig, that doesn't depend on guile but produces guile input files.

Does any know of any problems with any of them with 1.8?  In
particular, do gnucash and lilypond work with 1.8.0?

    Thanks,
-- 
    Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 185 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 143 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: 1.8 status

[Bruce Korb]

On 8/10/06, Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com> wrote:
> Here's the list of programs that use guile (1.6) in pkgsrc.
>
> ./cad/libgeda
> ./databases/guile-pg
> ./devel/autogen

> Does any know of any problems with any of them with 1.8?

I am trying to iron out "deprecated constructs" in autogen.
The latest release or two should work fine, other than the
deprecated warnings:

#if GUILE_VERSION >= 107000
    if (getenv( "GUILE_WARN_DEPRECATED" ) == NULL)
        putenv( (char*)(void*)"GUILE_WARN_DEPRECATED=no" );
#endif


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: 1.8 status

[Kevin Ryde]

Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com> writes:
>
> ./devel/guile-gtk
>
> Does any know of any problems with any of them with 1.8?

Version 0.5 of guile-gtk-1.2 works with either 1.6 or 1.8.  (The one
you build against has to be the one it runs against of course.)


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: 1.8 status

[Rob Browning]

Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com> writes:

> 1.8.0 seems to now be pretty old, and a diff of the head of
> branch_release-1-8 against release_1-8-0 (-Nu) gives 6088 lines, of
> which 2857 are new (ignorning hierarchy.pdf).
>
> The slib bug fix appears not to be present on the 1.8 branch, but I'm
> not quite sure - it seems only to be on the 1.6 branch, and not on
> HEAD.

Right.  The problem is that things have changed in 1.8, and we still
haven't worked out the right way to handle SLIB.  The solution will
almost certainly look a lot like the one in 1.6, but we also need to
make sure the upstream guile.init is appropriate for 1.8.

I've been talking with Aubrey Jaffer about this, but we've been going
fairly slowly.

The lack of SLIB support is one of the reasons that I haven't uploaded
1.8 packages for Debian yet.  I was hoping to wait until we had gotten
that worked out, but I've decided to just go ahead, so I should be
uploading 1.8 packages within about a week or so.

> Is it currently reasonable to use 1.8.0?  It seems there's been a lot
> of work on the branch, and that probably a 1.8.1 is in order.

I'm planning to release 1.8.0 in Debian, but I'll add patches when
they're needed.  I will probably be fairly conservative, though.  So
far, the only patch I know is going in is one to fix the numbers.test
failure.

> Does any know of any problems with any of them with 1.8?  In
> particular, do gnucash and lilypond work with 1.8.0?

I think lilypond probably does.

Thanks
-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592  F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: 1.8 status

[Kevin Ryde]

Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org> writes:
>
> So far, the only patch I know is going in is one to fix the
> numbers.test failure.

The array-set! breakage on bitvectors is bad too,

	* unif.c (bitvector_set): Use h->writable_elements not h->elements.


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: 1.8 status

[Greg Troxel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1323 bytes --]


Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org> writes:

> Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com> writes:
>
>> 1.8.0 seems to now be pretty old, and a diff of the head of
>> branch_release-1-8 against release_1-8-0 (-Nu) gives 6088 lines, of
>> which 2857 are new (ignorning hierarchy.pdf).
>>
>> The slib bug fix appears not to be present on the 1.8 branch, but I'm
>> not quite sure - it seems only to be on the 1.6 branch, and not on
>> HEAD.
>
> Right.  The problem is that things have changed in 1.8, and we still
> haven't worked out the right way to handle SLIB.  The solution will
> almost certainly look a lot like the one in 1.6, but we also need to
> make sure the upstream guile.init is appropriate for 1.8.
>
> I've been talking with Aubrey Jaffer about this, but we've been going
> fairly slowly.
>
> The lack of SLIB support is one of the reasons that I haven't uploaded
> 1.8 packages for Debian yet.  I was hoping to wait until we had gotten
> that worked out, but I've decided to just go ahead, so I should be
> uploading 1.8 packages within about a week or so.

Thanks.  I'll take this as guidance that 1.8.0 is alpha quality, and
should not yet be considered a production release, and that I
shouldn't upgrade pkgsrc yet.  I'll stick with 1.6.8 for now.

-- 
    Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 185 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 143 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

1.8 status

[Neil Jerram]

I believe the only important 1.8 bug still outstanding is the one
which causes Scheme data corruption on 64-bit platforms - and which is
usually enough to cause the build to fail in
snarf-check-and-output-texi.

Is there anything else of equal impact that I've forgotten?

I'm not sure how to proceed with debugging this (or rather with
advising someone else how to debug it, since I don't have a 64-bit box
myself), so does anyone else have ideas?  I've been assuming it's a GC
problem, i.e. data which should be marked but isn't for some reason,
but I guess it need not be; it could just be something modifying part
of the Scheme heap by mistake.

Here are references to some of the relevant threads.

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2006-02/msg00044.html



_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel