[Openmcl-devel] Ways around the with-simple-restart bug?

[mikel evins]

On Dec 6, 2004, at 9:20 PM, Gary Byers wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, John Wiseman wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 6, 2004, at 7:18 AM, Gary Byers wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately, there hasn't been a new release of OpenMCL in an even
>>> longer time.  (It would take a few days to put together, and I
>>> haven't had a few days' time in many months.)
>>
>> It seems unlikely, but... Is there any way that any of us could help
>> put a release together?
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>
>
> I think that lots of things would be better if there was an "0.14.2-p2"
> release; aside from the INVOKE-RESTART-INTERACTIVELY bug, there are
> a dozen or so other things that have been "fixed in CVS" for several
> months now.
>
> There are a few other things (Helmut Eller got the FFIGEN stuff working
> with GCC 3.x (3.3?), Rick Taube's GTK+ interfaces, other things that 
> I'm
> probably forgetting) that would be nice to package with a new release.
> I think that just getting a patch release built (incorporating existing
> bug fixes) is probably highest priority.
>
> The couple of days that I think it would take basically involves
> writing release notes, some amount of smoke-testing (sometimes not
> enough smoke-testing) on Darwin and Linux, and packaging binaries.
> (If that seems more like a few hours' work than a few days', I'd tend
> to agree; somehow, every time I've alotted a few hours for it it's
> wound up taking a few days.)
>
> The way that Clozure (the machine) is set up requires a little bit of
> security paranoia (Clozure the consulting company keeps some customer
> data on clozure the machine, and "clozure.com" and
> "openmcl.clozure.com" are the same physical box.)  There's a way to
> set up SSH-based CVS write access that's a little funky but that
> works pretty well, and it wouldn't take a long time to set up some
> sort of reasonably secure FTP equivalent (knock  wood.)
>
> In theory, the stuff that's in the main 0.14 CVS tree should just
> need to have its version number changed and should be ready to go.
> (I know that I've botched a few things: checked bug fixes into the
> bleeding edge tree and forgot to check them into the main tree, and
> I know that I've tried to un-botch those cases that I've caught ...
> see why it takes a couple of days ?)  Theory and reality may be a
> little out-of-synch.
>
> If anyone's interested in doing this, that'd be great; please let
> me know

I'm interested, and could probably shove some things aside for a few 
days to help out, if it would be useful.

--me