[Openmcl-devel] Failing to build 64 bit ccl/x86

John McAleely john at mcaleely.com
Tue Aug 18 10:23:09 PDT 2009

On 18 Aug 2009, at 17:07, Tim Bradshaw wrote:

> On 18 Aug 2009, at 16:13, Gary Byers wrote:
>> Someone else who failed to notice the fine print about "svn update"
>> not updating binaries wound up with both the old kernel and old image
>> after the recent change; they reported (I think that they just sent
>> email to me) that the first file that was compiled after the file
>> containing COMPILE-FILE ("ccl:lib;nfcomp") caused a fasl version
>> mismatch error when it was loaded. (COMPILE-FILE had been updated to
>> use the new fasl version; the loader in the old image still insisted
>> on the old version.)
> That was me, and I am pretty sure that this diagnosis is right: it  
> all fell to bits at the point it tried loading fasls from the new  
> compiler in the old image / kernel.

This seems very plausible for my problem too, with one caveat. I do  
not believe I have observed 'conflicted' status on the subversion  
controlled binaries.

I believe the sequence could be:

  - get a binary from svn
  - rebuild it locally. It now has 'M' status
  - the binary is updated in svn
  - svn up should now result in a conflict for that file. My own  
practice has been to resolve such things as 'theirs-full' at all times
  - now the local binary should not differ from the svn version
  - *here* I build ccl and run in to trouble, for reasons unclear to me.

Of course, it is quite likely I've made a mistake driving and  
observing in svn, but I don't have proof of that.


More information about the Openmcl-devel mailing list