02:38:15 -!- christoph_debian [~christoph@ppp-188-174-182-249.dynamic.mnet-online.de] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 02:52:59 christoph_debian [~christoph@ppp-188-174-137-115.dynamic.mnet-online.de] has joined #sbcl 03:28:17 -!- davazp [~user@204.Red-79-153-96.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:30:18 drmeister [~drmeister@d205-250-223-135.bchsia.telus.net] has joined #sbcl 03:30:58 Guest18998 [~rett@64.124.28.131] has joined #sbcl 03:35:33 -!- Guest18998 [~rett@64.124.28.131] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 03:36:23 Guest18998 [~rett@64.124.28.131] has joined #sbcl 03:48:09 -!- Guest18998 [~rett@64.124.28.131] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 03:57:17 Quadresce_ [~quad@unaffiliated/quadrescence] has joined #sbcl 03:57:43 -!- Quadrescence [~quad@unaffiliated/quadrescence] has quit [Disconnected by services] 03:57:51 -!- Quadresce_ is now known as Quadrescence 04:16:57 pnpuff [~void@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has joined #sbcl 04:19:58 slyrus [~chatzilla@107.200.11.156] has joined #sbcl 04:35:04 pnpuff_ [~void@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has joined #sbcl 04:37:54 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has joined #sbcl 04:38:33 -!- pnpuff [~void@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 04:41:54 ehaliewicz [~user@50-0-51-11.dsl.static.sonic.net] has joined #sbcl 04:54:16 -!- wbooze [~wbooze@xdsl-78-35-156-159.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 05:01:20 -!- pnpuff_ [~void@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has quit [] 05:20:03 pnpuff [~pit@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has joined #sbcl 05:56:43 -!- Bike [~Glossina@174-25-52-6.ptld.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 06:52:30 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 06:54:07 -!- drmeister [~drmeister@d205-250-223-135.bchsia.telus.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:03:09 -!- pnpuff [~pit@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 07:10:05 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has joined #sbcl 07:11:32 -!- Quadrescence [~quad@unaffiliated/quadrescence] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 07:36:45 -!- yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 07:39:39 echo-area [~user@182.92.247.2] has joined #sbcl 07:43:30 yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has joined #sbcl 08:04:50 has anybody seen this deadlock[1] in threads.pure.lisp (:semaphore-notification :wait-on-semaphore) before? it seems to be not /that/ rare. [1] https://ci.cor-lab.org/job/sbcl-master-reproduce/label=ubuntu_quantal_64bit/2/console 08:05:35 it looks like a lost wakeup problem, but i could not yet figure out how it happens 08:15:36 benkard [~benkard@dhcp-138-246-84-189.dynamic.eduroam.mwn.de] has joined #sbcl 08:23:03 stassats [~stassats@wikipedia/stassats] has joined #sbcl 08:31:16 <|3b|> lp 1038034 08:31:16 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1038034 08:31:31 <|3b|> scymtym: ^ that one? 08:32:12 |3b|: yes 08:32:36 *|3b|* has seen it a few times since that report 08:32:39 however, i think waiting for T99 is just the symptom 08:32:44 Sagane [~Sagane@177.100-226-89.dsl.completel.net] has joined #sbcl 08:33:13 the real problems seems to be that one semaphore notification is lost 08:33:25 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 08:33:59 inspecting the semaphore object in the locked up state shows that its count is 1 and its waitcount has the correct number of waiters (usually slightly below 50) 08:34:01 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has joined #sbcl 08:34:12 however, none of the waiters gets woken up 08:34:54 interrupting one of the waiters, even if the interruption does nothing, resolves the deadlock 09:02:18 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 09:03:12 pnpuff [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has joined #sbcl 09:12:14 <|3b|> scymtym: well, at least the assert failure seems to be thread getting interrupted after it increments n 09:12:28 *|3b|* wouldn't be surprised if that confuses the other part too 09:13:37 |3b|: i haven't seen the failed assertion yet 09:13:43 only deadlocks so far 09:13:48 <|3b|> decreasing the sleep in critical a bit seems to make it a bit more likely 09:14:38 <|3b|> though could also be that i'm printing stuff, which probably affects timing as well 09:15:35 *|3b|* wonders if the deadlock is from it interrupting the sleep with terminate thread 09:16:00 <|3b|> so it never re-signals the semaphore 09:16:37 <|3b|> though i guess the uwp should do that, so maybe it interrupts whatever would set the notification status? 09:18:10 |3b|: i couldn't figure that out either 09:18:26 however, without the interruptor thread, everything seems to be fine 09:18:49 so it has to have something to do with the interruptions 09:26:00 angavrilov [~angavrilo@217.71.227.190] has joined #sbcl 09:27:11 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has joined #sbcl 09:33:30 -!- benkard [~benkard@dhcp-138-246-84-189.dynamic.eduroam.mwn.de] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz] 09:35:37 -!- echo-area [~user@182.92.247.2] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:19:38 pnpuff_ [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has joined #sbcl 10:22:57 -!- pnpuff [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 10:24:05 -!- Sagane [~Sagane@177.100-226-89.dsl.completel.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 10:32:05 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 10:33:15 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@92.46.2.136] has joined #sbcl 10:33:15 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@92.46.2.136] has quit [Changing host] 10:33:15 attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has joined #sbcl 10:37:13 -!- ehaliewicz [~user@50-0-51-11.dsl.static.sonic.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 10:37:38 -!- pnpuff_ [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has quit [] 10:39:21 segv- [~mb@95-91-243-220-dynip.superkabel.de] has joined #sbcl 10:43:06 pnpuff- [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has joined #sbcl 10:45:26 -!- yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 10:54:23 yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has joined #sbcl 10:58:15 benkard [~benkard@dhcp-138-246-84-189.dynamic.eduroam.mwn.de] has joined #sbcl 11:23:51 -!- kanru [~kanru@118-163-10-190.HINET-IP.hinet.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 11:35:17 kanru [~kanru@byebi.wara.tw] has joined #sbcl 11:36:35 |3b|: with http://paste.lisp.org/display/138107, the problem seems to go away for me; could you try what happens for you? 11:50:42 -!- kanru [~kanru@byebi.wara.tw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:55:53 -!- yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 11:57:41 milanj [~milanj@cable-94-189-130-125.dynamic.sbb.rs] has joined #sbcl 12:12:02 <|3b|> scymtym: that doesn't look quite right to me 12:12:40 |3b|: because it's wasteful? 12:12:44 <|3b|> seems like it would work around the test, but not sure if it would fix the problem 12:13:28 <|3b|> possibly the test is just bad 12:14:46 i think the problem is a lost wakeup when a thread is woken up and simultaneously terminated 12:15:09 -!- benkard [~benkard@dhcp-138-246-84-189.dynamic.eduroam.mwn.de] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz] 12:15:31 of course, one solution would be to try and avoid possibility in the test 12:15:33 <|3b|> yeah, interrupting right as futex_wait returns was my best guess 12:15:52 that's what i figured as well 12:17:22 -!- milanj [~milanj@cable-94-189-130-125.dynamic.sbb.rs] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 12:17:51 i though the patch might make the interface a bit more forgiving without sacrificing much performance (since NOTIFY-FAILED? should rarely be true) 12:19:29 <|3b|> seems like it either shouldn't wake something else up, or shouldn't depend on wanting a notification 12:19:59 <|3b|> if being interrupted in the middle of a wakeup doesn't count as being waked up, it should wake something else regardless of notification 12:20:08 <|3b|> if it does, it should set the notification and not wake anything 12:20:28 <|3b|> and probably decrement the count as well 12:21:10 <|3b|> (probably should get some input from someone who actually knows how thread stuff is supposed to work in either case though :) 12:21:20 can the count be increment when it unwinds? 12:21:30 i thought that could not happen 12:22:00 that's true 12:22:54 btw, the failed assertion seems to be an independent effect: i found a case in which a thread performed the (incf n) and still ended :aborted 12:23:03 <|3b|> when i was messing with it earlier, count was usually 1 when it deadlocked, and condition looked like something tried to wake something 12:23:29 <|3b|> yeah, probably 12:23:46 yes, in all cases i saw, count and waitcount where correct and just the wakeup got lost 12:24:00 <|3b|> 'correct' as in 1 or 0? 12:24:28 <|3b|> for count that is 12:24:29 1, so the semaphore would be available but no thread woke up to acquire it 12:27:18 re aborted threads: i think the WITH-LOCAL-INTERRUPTS section in INITIAL-THREAD-FUNCTION-TRAMPOLINE is too large and allows threads to be interrupted, unwound and terminated after they returned normally 12:34:50 abarch [~user@2001:638:504:2093:21d:9ff:fe30:1f87] has joined #sbcl 12:35:19 yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has joined #sbcl 12:38:53 <|3b|> actually, i guess maybe condition-wait should be dealing with it 12:40:14 you mean condition-wait could do additional wakeups when it is unwound? 12:40:20 milanj [~milanj@82.117.199.26] has joined #sbcl 12:40:39 <|3b|> maybe 12:41:11 -!- asedeno [~asedeno@66.102.14.24] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 12:43:13 asedeno [~asedeno@66.102.14.24] has joined #sbcl 12:44:50 <|3b|> seems like it needs to be able to detect if it got interrupted after it was woken up to deal with it properly, not sure if that is possible 12:45:19 me neither 12:45:43 but spurious wakeups are to be expected anyway 12:46:23 so doing one "just in case" should only hurt performance a little and not be a problem otherwise 12:46:28 (if i understand correctly) 12:46:38 <|3b|> hmm, could be 12:48:52 i think, will test the path more thoroughly and then, maybe, attach it the bug report for review 12:49:10 s/path/patch/ 12:50:23 homie [~homie@xdsl-78-35-132-153.netcologne.de] has joined #sbcl 12:51:18 nyef [~nyef@c-50-157-244-41.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #sbcl 12:53:51 *|3b|* wonders if condition-wait should try to grab the mutex even when interrupted and not :ok 12:54:14 <|3b|> interrupt-thread during futex-wait would make it return EINTR, right? 12:55:04 <|3b|> i guess if so, grabbing it wouldn't help, since that couldn't provide any extra information to caller 12:58:29 <|3b|> hmm, i guess it wouldn't get to the CASE even if it did return EINTR though 13:00:23 benkard [~benkard@dhcp-138-246-88-86.dynamic.eduroam.mwn.de] has joined #sbcl 13:03:48 -!- pnpuff- [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has quit [Quit: bye] 13:07:34 pranavrc [~pranavrc@unaffiliated/pranavrc] has joined #sbcl 13:09:36 wbooze [~wbooze@xdsl-78-35-132-153.netcologne.de] has joined #sbcl 13:13:40 <|3b|> scymtym: yeah, i think i'm leaning towards condition-wait doing an extra wakeup when it looks like it might have been interrupted during a real wakeup 13:14:16 <|3b|> something like checking for (and :interrupt (not (eq (waitqueue-token queue) me))) 13:14:19 Sagane [~Sagane@177.100-226-89.dsl.completel.net] has joined #sbcl 13:15:15 |3b|: i'm not sure i understand how condition-wait unwinds when interrupted (even without your proposed change) 13:15:16 *|3b|* isn't sure if checking the token without the mutex held could give false negatives or not, doesn't seem like it 13:16:40 <|3b|> my understanding is that if the futex-wait is interrupted (before or after getting woken up), it skips the CASE, and SETF so STATUS stays :interrupted 13:19:39 <|3b|> then in the unwind-protect, all the WHEN see that and don't do anything, then it continues unwinding 13:20:04 seems like it 13:20:34 so, currently, status = :interrupted wouldn't matter due to unwinding 13:21:36 <|3b|> status = :interrupted means we are unwinding due to a non-local exit instead of unwinding normally, which pretty much means interrupt-thread since i don't thing futex-wait does any nlx 13:21:43 but in PROTECTED in (without-interrupts (unwind-protect ... PROTECTED)) one could signal "just in case"? 13:22:27 yes 13:22:49 <|3b|> by protected you mean the cleanup for the unwind-protect? 13:23:49 <|3b|> if so, i think that is more or less what i'm thinking 13:24:30 <|3b|> i just suggested trying to limit it so it doesn't happen in the normal case 13:25:12 <|3b|> actually, always adding an extra wakeup would probably be bad, since then that wakeup would cause another wakeup, etc 13:26:28 <|3b|> might even want a test to make sure that doesn't happen accidentally either way if adding extra wakeups 13:26:41 sure, only when status remains :interrupted 13:29:08 my previous kludgy solution survived 550 repetitions of (:semaphore-notification :wait-on-semaphore) 13:29:21 trying modified condition-wait now 13:36:47 -!- angavrilov [~angavrilo@217.71.227.190] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 13:39:09 angavrilov [~angavrilo@217.71.227.190] has joined #sbcl 13:43:07 -!- benkard [~benkard@dhcp-138-246-88-86.dynamic.eduroam.mwn.de] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz] 13:57:17 jarod_ch_ [~jarod_che@115.193.165.101] has joined #sbcl 14:00:54 davazp [~user@204.Red-79-153-96.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #sbcl 14:15:23 -!- bege [~bege@S0106001d7e5132b0.ed.shawcable.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 14:29:37 -!- jarod_ch_ [~jarod_che@115.193.165.101] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: http://www.textualapp.com/] 14:32:16 -!- davazp [~user@204.Red-79-153-96.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 14:37:01 pnpuff- [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has joined #sbcl 14:37:42 <|3b|> scymtym: yeah, seems to help, 1000 iterations with (not-quite-correctly) patched condition-wait here 14:48:20 <|3b|> trying full tests now 14:48:40 pnpuff` [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has joined #sbcl 14:51:45 -!- pnpuff- [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 14:57:10 |3b|: did you change the test to get rid of the assertion failure? i had to change it 14:57:57 <|3b|> yeah, i made it just print the results, failed that part i think twice in the 1k 14:58:53 i just recorded all threads which successfully did the (incf n) in the list 14:59:32 i think, thread results cannot be made uninterruptible 15:20:55 attila_lendvai1 [~attila_le@92.46.2.136] has joined #sbcl 15:20:55 -!- attila_lendvai [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has quit [Disconnected by services] 15:20:55 -!- attila_lendvai1 [~attila_le@92.46.2.136] has quit [Changing host] 15:20:55 attila_lendvai1 [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has joined #sbcl 15:34:17 Bike [~Glossina@174-25-52-6.ptld.qwest.net] has joined #sbcl 15:36:44 benkard [~benkard@dhcp-138-246-108-143.dynamic.eduroam.mwn.de] has joined #sbcl 15:39:56 loke` [~user@119.234.0.59] has joined #sbcl 15:46:08 -!- pnpuff` [~v@unaffiliated/pnpuff] has quit [] 16:32:47 drmeister [~drmeister@d205-250-223-135.bchsia.telus.net] has joined #sbcl 16:40:41 -!- attila_lendvai1 [~attila_le@unaffiliated/attila-lendvai/x-3126965] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 16:43:22 -!- wbooze [~wbooze@xdsl-78-35-132-153.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 16:44:03 -!- benkard [~benkard@dhcp-138-246-108-143.dynamic.eduroam.mwn.de] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz] 16:52:14 -!- drmeister [~drmeister@d205-250-223-135.bchsia.telus.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:02:44 -!- loke` [~user@119.234.0.59] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:20:57 Fare [~fare@cpe-69-203-115-132.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #sbcl 18:29:38 -!- pranavrc [~pranavrc@unaffiliated/pranavrc] has quit [Quit: Ping timeout: ] 18:33:00 -!- yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 18:33:18 Can someone test https://bugs.launchpad.net/sbcl/+bug/379472 on HEAD (and win32)? 18:39:13 yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has joined #sbcl 18:41:51 drmeister [~drmeister@S010610ddb1c81950.vf.shawcable.net] has joined #sbcl 19:10:30 Can this be merged into SBCL? The guys at ITA (I'm not there anymore) use it successfully: https://bugs.launchpad.net/sbcl/+bug/1132254 19:10:47 gets rid of asdf at runtime for contribs 19:11:22 not without reviewing, which takes time 19:21:23 foom not considered a proper reviewer? 19:21:38 no 19:21:43 scymtym_ [~user@ip-5-147-122-209.unitymediagroup.de] has joined #sbcl 19:22:20 I didn't review it anyways 19:22:24 I just used it. :) 19:23:04 -!- Krystof [~user@81.174.155.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:23:16 the person who performs the commit is a proper reviewer 19:24:34 pkhuong: on win7: 1.1.4 => "An exception occurred", HEAD (dacd3f) => :out 19:26:04 benkard [~benkard@mnch-5d8691fe.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #sbcl 19:27:06 scymtym_: awesome 19:30:40 -!- yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 19:32:16 -!- milanj [~milanj@82.117.199.26] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:34:38 Krystof [~user@81.174.155.115] has joined #sbcl 19:34:38 -!- ChanServ has set mode +o Krystof 19:35:14 -!- homie [~homie@xdsl-78-35-132-153.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: Verlassend] 19:36:46 oleo [~oleo@xdsl-78-35-132-153.netcologne.de] has joined #sbcl 19:37:12 -!- oleo [~oleo@xdsl-78-35-132-153.netcologne.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 19:37:25 yacks [~py@180.151.36.168] has joined #sbcl 19:38:13 oleo [~oleo@xdsl-78-35-132-153.netcologne.de] has joined #sbcl 19:47:43 -!- stassats [~stassats@wikipedia/stassats] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 20:03:06 milanj [~milanj@cable-94-189-130-125.dynamic.sbb.rs] has joined #sbcl 20:04:23 -!- Bike [~Glossina@174-25-52-6.ptld.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 20:05:56 Bike [~Glossina@67-5-238-88.ptld.qwest.net] has joined #sbcl 20:09:44 -!- drmeister [~drmeister@S010610ddb1c81950.vf.shawcable.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:12:06 -!- angavrilov [~angavrilo@217.71.227.190] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:14:13 Bike_ [~Glossina@67-5-243-71.ptld.qwest.net] has joined #sbcl 20:14:16 -!- Bike [~Glossina@67-5-238-88.ptld.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 20:14:48 stassats [~stassats@wikipedia/stassats] has joined #sbcl 20:15:29 -!- Bike_ is now known as Bike 20:20:32 ehaliewicz [~user@50-0-51-11.dsl.static.sonic.net] has joined #sbcl 20:22:26 prxq [~mommer@mnhm-590c2285.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #sbcl 20:43:42 -!- prxq [~mommer@mnhm-590c2285.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:54:14 -!- stassats [~stassats@wikipedia/stassats] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 20:58:18 drmeister [~drmeister@d205-250-223-135.bchsia.telus.net] has joined #sbcl 21:00:13 -!- benkard [~benkard@mnch-5d8691fe.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 21:14:07 benkard [~benkard@mnch-5d8691fe.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #sbcl 21:24:41 -!- drmeister [~drmeister@d205-250-223-135.bchsia.telus.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:31:49 -!- Bike [~Glossina@67-5-243-71.ptld.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 21:35:18 Bike_ [~Glossina@75-175-65-137.ptld.qwest.net] has joined #sbcl 21:36:21 drmeister [~drmeister@174.1.114.236] has joined #sbcl 21:39:49 -!- benkard [~benkard@mnch-5d8691fe.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 21:40:32 benkard [~benkard@mnch-5d8691fe.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #sbcl 21:41:28 -!- drmeister [~drmeister@174.1.114.236] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 21:50:34 why do we still ship asdf-install? 21:54:29 -!- benkard [~benkard@mnch-5d8691fe.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 21:55:40 Delete! 21:55:41 -!- Bike_ is now known as Bike 21:55:57 Ex. 21:55:58 Term. 21:56:00 In. 21:56:01 Ate! 22:04:40 drmeister [~drmeister@d205-250-223-135.bchsia.telus.net] has joined #sbcl 22:10:18 benkard [~benkard@mnch-5d8691fe.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #sbcl 22:19:00 is it just me or should fare's big patch referenced above be split up into a whole bunch of more fine-grained changes? 22:23:09 -!- segv- [~mb@95-91-243-220-dynip.superkabel.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 22:25:59 what would it be split by? 22:27:47 slyrus, what big patch? 22:27:55 https://launchpadlibrarian.net/144206397/0001-Make-it-so-contribs-do-not-require-either-ASDF-or-so.patch 22:28:16 asdf has already been committed, so there's ~50KB of patch left, which isn't so big, actually 22:30:17 -!- benkard [~benkard@mnch-5d8691fe.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com] 22:41:13 oh, btw, I'll be visiting boston some time next week. Suggestions? Good places for poor more or less newly-grads? 22:44:22 -!- oleo [~oleo@xdsl-78-35-132-153.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: Verlassend] 23:04:06 foom: ok, but, still, it seems like there are various unrelated changes in there, BICBW 23:05:18 turns out trying to remove asdf-install causes sb-bsd-sockets-tests to puke when trying to load/compile sb-posix 23:05:20 fun 23:14:26 sdemarre [~serge@216.112-64-87.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has joined #sbcl 23:15:32 pkhuong: Are you likely to have time for a meet-up? 23:17:04 nyef: I'll be there with a friend for ~3 days. Lunch or dinner should be doable. I wouldn't impose a full-blown lispy meet up on said friend, though ;) 23:18:18 Heh. Fair enough. 23:18:53 I should be available most evenings except for Friday and possibly Wednesday, and making my excuses for lunch at the office is fairly straightforward. 23:23:14 all right. We're thinking of leaving Montreal early Monday, and go back Thursday afternoon. 23:23:26 -!- Sagane [~Sagane@177.100-226-89.dsl.completel.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 23:23:55 So Tuesday or Wednesday evening would be best for a dinner meetup... 23:28:45 Quadrescence [~quad@unaffiliated/quadrescence] has joined #sbcl 23:32:26 -!- milanj [~milanj@cable-94-189-130-125.dynamic.sbb.rs] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 23:33:32 Sagane [~Sagane@177.100-226-89.dsl.completel.net] has joined #sbcl 23:35:41 I need to head out, need to buy groceries on my way back to the place of rest. I might be online a bit tomorrow, otherwise I'll probably be offline until Monday. 23:35:42 ah, coordination failure; it'll be the week after. Is Tuesday (the 30th) in the evening still good for you? 23:36:08 The 30th? Workable, but not ideal. 23:36:45 The 31st would be better for me, actually. 23:38:05 sounds good. we can figure it out in 10 days. 23:38:19 Okay, cool. 23:39:07 And now I need to sign off, pack up, and get going. Looking forward to finally meeting you, though. (-: 23:39:12 -!- nyef [~nyef@c-50-157-244-41.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: G'night all.] 23:48:58 -!- sdemarre [~serge@216.112-64-87.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 23:49:14 -!- Quadrescence [~quad@unaffiliated/quadrescence] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 23:49:36 Quadrescence [~quad@unaffiliated/quadrescence] has joined #sbcl