Hi,
Just to clarify, there really does seems to be some odd problem
with clisp, not maxima, on OS X. We've had all several people build
clisp-2.31 through .33 with inconsistent results. It works fine for
some and not for others. I can't get vanilla clisp-2.33 to build on my
OS X 10.3.4 system, but others have reported that it works for them
and asked why we've haven't updated darwinports.
I believe the output Marc included is from clisp's "make check".
The situation as I understand it is this:
Maxima should soon work on clisp > 2.29, however,
clisp > 2.29 is problematic on Mac OS X, for reasons
that are not understood. This is independent of maxima.
Best Wishes,
Greg Wright
On Jun 8, 2004, at 2:32 PM, James Amundson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I haven't responded to this earlier because I have been busy putting
> the
> final touches on the 5.9.1beta release. Also, this problem has been
> asked and answered many, many times before on this mailing list, the
> sci.math.symbolic newsgroup, etc.
>
> The previous answer you received that indicated that the problem you
> see
> was some sort of mysterious, unsolved problem was terrible; there is a
> known problem that was fixed in cvs ages ago. I regret that is taking
> so
> long to produce a polished release that works with clisps > 2.29. In
> the
> meantime, please download a snapshot release from the maxima.sf.net
> site.
>
> I have a question about what you saw. The test suite should have many
> failures with Maxima 5.9.0 + clisp > 2.29. However:
>
> On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 10:35, Marc Charpentier wrote:
>
>>> You might want to try to build clisp from source and run "make
>>> check".
>>
>> Done.
>> There are no problems (as far as I can tell):
>>
>> Real time: 64.245186 sec.
>> Run time: 61.27 sec.
>> Space: 149577680 Bytes
>> GC: 107, GC time: 9.06 sec.
>> 8769 ;
>> 0
>> Bye.
>> (echo *.erg | grep '*' >/dev/null) || (echo "Test failed:" ; ls -l
>> *erg; echo "To see which tests failed, type" ; echo " cat
>> "`pwd`"/*.erg" ; exit 1)
>> echo "Test passed."
>> Test passed.
>
> I am completely confused by the above output. Where did that bit of
> shell script come from? Is it some fink thing? Why does it think the
> tests passed? What was the output of the tests, anyway?
>
> I've taken several steps to avoid the problem you are seeing in future
> versions of maxima. I would really like to understand where the above
> code that (erroneously, I hope) reports "Test passed." comes from.
>
> --Jim Amundson
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima@www.math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>