Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
FS#25562 - [maxima] can't load .core for different runtime
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Leif Warner (pdxleif) - Sunday, 14 August 2011, 04:09 GMT
Last edited by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Monday, 15 August 2011, 13:22 GMT
Opened by Leif Warner (pdxleif) - Sunday, 14 August 2011, 04:09 GMT
Last edited by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Monday, 15 August 2011, 13:22 GMT
|
DetailsI think this might need to be re-built? There was just a sbcl update:
extra/sbcl 1.0.50-1 1 -> 2 but no corresponding maxima update. When I run maxima now, it says: fatal error encountered in SBCL pid 3940(tid 140737353983744): can't load .core for different runtime, sorry Welcome to LDB, a low-level debugger for the Lisp runtime environment. ldb> |
This task depends upon
Closed by Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Monday, 15 August 2011, 13:22 GMT
Reason for closing: Fixed
Additional comments about closing: maxima-5.24.0-5
Monday, 15 August 2011, 13:22 GMT
Reason for closing: Fixed
Additional comments about closing: maxima-5.24.0-5
Comment by Eugene (Infy) -
Sunday, 14 August 2011, 09:45 GMT
Same with i686.
Comment by Robin Becker (replabrobin) -
Sunday, 14 August 2011, 12:56 GMT
I can confirm this in both x86_64 and i686. I have fixed by rebuilding via source package using abs. After re-installing with pacman -U the same package works. So it is just that the maxima package depends on the exact sbcl.
Comment by Ronald van Haren (pressh) -
Monday, 15 August 2011, 11:05 GMT
Yes maxima needs a rebuilt whenever sbcl is updated. Not sure what Dave changed between 1.0.50-1 and -2 that it is also needed here. I'll get to this tonight if Dave didn't do it beforehand.
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) -
Monday, 15 August 2011, 12:22 GMT
Hmm, the only change between 1.0.50-1 -> 2 is a kernel version parsing patch to keep sbcl from segfaulting. I can take care of this.