Bug#1086128: src:sbcl: fails to migrate to testing for too long

[Paul Gevers]

Hi ppc64el porters, Sean,

@porters, can you please have a look at the ppc64el autopkgtest
regressions caused by sbcl [1]?

I don't think I can do anything about this bug. Upstream aren't able to
reproduce it. I don't think it makes sense to block sbcl's migration on
this. I think that either we should ignore the cl-ironclad test failure
on ppc64el or remove sbcl on that architecture, if you think that would
be warranted.

cl-ironclad *and* cl-postmodern. And the error is identical:
no size function for object at 0x100009bf80 (widetag 0x33)

Please let me know if you would be okay with overriding the test
failure.

I assuming you didn't contact the ppc64el porters yet (apologies if you
did). Shall we give them a chance to investigate?

Paul

[1] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=sbcl

[Paul Gevers]

Dear ppc64el porters: ping.

Dear Sean,

Post by Paul Gevers

I don't think I can do anything about this bug.  Upstream aren't able to
reproduce it.  I don't think it makes sense to block sbcl's migration on
this.  I think that either we should ignore the cl-ironclad test failure
on ppc64el or remove sbcl on that architecture, if you think that would
be warranted.

no size function for object at 0x100009bf80 (widetag 0x33)

How severe do you think this error is? Does it indicate that sbcl is
useless on ppc64el or is this a niche use case?

Removal of sbcl on ppc64el seems to be going to be non-trivial as it's a
key package via cl-cffi which is needed for brltty which is very
important for our accessibility support (pulled in via d-i if I'm not
mistaken).

Paul

[Sean Whitton]

Hello,

Post by Paul Gevers
How severe do you think this error is? Does it indicate that sbcl is
useless on ppc64el or is this a niche use case?

I would doubt that it means that sbcl is useless on ppc64el because of
how upstream can't reproduce the problem.

Post by Paul Gevers
Removal of sbcl on ppc64el seems to be going to be non-trivial as it's a key
package via cl-cffi which is needed for brltty which is very important for our
accessibility support (pulled in via d-i if I'm not mistaken).

An alternative would just be to downgrade sbcl with a +really version.

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi,

Post by Sean Whitton

Post by Paul Gevers
How severe do you think this error is? Does it indicate that sbcl is
useless on ppc64el or is this a niche use case?

I would doubt that it means that sbcl is useless on ppc64el because of
how upstream can't reproduce the problem.

Ack. Let's give the porters a few more days, and otherwise accept the
regression of cl-ironclad and cl-postmodern on ppc64el.

Has this issue been reported to sbcl upstream? I'm not sure whether PowerPC
porters are necessarily experts on Lisp compilers such as SBCL.

Adrian

[Sean Whitton]

Hello Paul,

Thanks for hinting it through. I'll let you know if it comes up again
in a way which suggests the problem is more serious than thought.