I've finally got round to releasing version 5.7. The source code was actually tagged as 5.7 on Github a while ago and Github considered that a release. There are Windows installers for 32-bit and 64-bit as well as the normal source code for everything else.
I'm aware that there are still some unresolved issues with this version but it seems to be stable enough for release.
David
Hi David,
Is there going to be a fixes-5.7 branch as with previous releases?
Cheers, Ramana
On 13 May 2017 at 00:50, David Matthews <David.Matthews at prolingua.co.uk> wrote:
I've finally got round to releasing version 5.7. The source code was actually tagged as 5.7 on Github a while ago and Github considered that a release. There are Windows installers for 32-bit and 64-bit as well as the normal source code for everything else.
I'm aware that there are still some unresolved issues with this version but it seems to be stable enough for release.
David _______________________________________________ polyml mailing list polyml at inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/polyml
Hi Ramana, I was going to do that at some stage, perhaps when there was something to include, but I've done it now. Regards, David
On 16/05/2017 04:33, Ramana Kumar wrote:
Hi David,
Is there going to be a fixes-5.7 branch as with previous releases?
Cheers, Ramana
On 13 May 2017 at 00:50, David Matthews <David.Matthews at prolingua.co.uk> wrote:
I've finally got round to releasing version 5.7. The source code was actually tagged as 5.7 on Github a while ago and Github considered that a release. There are Windows installers for 32-bit and 64-bit as well as the normal source code for everything else.
I'm aware that there are still some unresolved issues with this version but it seems to be stable enough for release.
David _______________________________________________ polyml mailing list polyml at inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/polyml
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:50 AM, David Matthews <David.Matthews at prolingua.co.uk> wrote:
I've finally got round to releasing version 5.7. The source code was actually tagged as 5.7 on Github a while ago and Github considered that a release. There are Windows installers for 32-bit and 64-bit as well as the normal source code for everything else.
I'm aware that there are still some unresolved issues with this version but it seems to be stable enough for release.
I attempted to build this version for Fedora. It succeeded on all architectures except aarch64:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=19526061
I don't understand the failure, though. We run "make check" after the build to gain some confidence that the build is good. Here is an extract from the build log (https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6133/19526133/build.log):
echo "val () = use "./Tests/RunTests"; val () = OS.Process.exit(if runTests "./Tests" then OS.Process.success else OS.Process.failure):unit;" | ./poly Poly/ML 5.7 Release val runTests = fn: string -> bool Test137.ML => Passed Test101.ML => Passed Test032.ML => Passed Test056.ML => Passed Test080.ML => Passed Test136.ML => Passed Test127.ML => Passed Test065.ML => Passed Test100.ML => Passed Test145.ML => Passed Test025.ML => Passed Test003.ML => Passed Test144.ML => Passed Test109.ML => Passed Test128.ML => Passed Test019.ML => Passed Test015.ML => Passed Test009.ML => Passed Test037.ML => Passed Test113.ML => Passed Test162.ML => Passed Test072.ML => Passed Test061.ML => Passed Test118.ML => Passed Test051.ML => Passed Test103.ML => Passed Test083.ML => Passed Test134.ML => Passed Test159.ML => Passed Test126.ML => Passed Test077.ML => Passed Test020.ML => Passed Test026.ML => Passed Test131.ML => Passed Test021.ML => Passed Test013.ML => Passed Test052.ML => Passed Test169.ML => Passed Test115.ML => Passed Test170.ML => Passed Test116.ML => Passed Test148.ML => Passed Test151.ML => Passed Test117.ML => Passed Test066.ML => Passed Test147.ML => Passed Test097.ML => Passed Test007.ML => Passed Test016.ML => Passed Test139.ML => Passed Test120.ML => Passed Test168.ML => Passed Test047.ML => Passed Test158.ML => Passed Test157.ML => Passed Test091.ML => Passed Test140.ML => Passed Test022.ML => Passed Test001.ML => Passed Test138.ML => Passed Test040.ML => Passed Test028.ML => Passed Test011.ML => Passed Test106.ML => Passed Test074.ML => Passed Test010.ML => Passed Test081.ML => Passed Test038.ML => Passed Test031.ML => Passed Test014.ML => Passed Test164.ML => Passed Test057.ML => Passed Test048.ML => Passed Test107.ML => Passed Test006.ML => Passed Test063.ML => Passed Test142.ML => Passed Test073.ML => Passed Test033.ML => Passed Test133.ML => Done Passed Test036.ML => Passed Test018.ML => Passed Test035.ML => Passed Test129.ML => Passed Test024.ML => Passed Test004.ML => Passed Test090.ML => Passed Test112.ML => Passed Test084.ML => Passed Test123.ML => Passed Test155.ML => Passed Test076.ML => Passed Test165.ML => Passed Test104.ML => Passed Test046.ML => Passed Test030.ML => Passed Test089.ML => Passed Test023.ML => Passed Test088.ML => Passed Test064.ML => Passed Test163.ML => Passed Test122.ML => Passed Test111.ML => Passed Test045.ML => Passed Test161.ML => Passed Test095.ML => Passed Test152.ML => Passed Test049.ML => Passed Test166.ML => Passed Test062.ML => Passed Test094.ML => Passed Test012.ML => Passed Test079.ML => Passed Test087.ML => Passed Test058.ML => Passed Test059.ML => Passed Test135.ML => Passed Test132.ML => Passed Test039.ML => Passed Test002.ML => Passed Test160.ML => Passed Test119.ML => Passed Test093.ML => Passed Test124.ML => Passed Test167.ML => Passed Test105.ML => Passed Test146.ML => Passed Test078.ML => Passed Test102.ML => Passed Test092.ML => Passed Test098.ML => Passed Test068.ML => Passed Test005.ML => Passed Test125.ML => Passed Test041.ML => Passed Test108.ML => Passed Test050.ML => Passed Test034.ML => Passed Test149.ML => Passed Test027.ML => Passed Test143.ML => Passed Test055.ML => Passed Test150.ML => Passed Test008.ML => Passed Test096.ML => Passed Test121.ML => Passed Test070.ML => Passed Test082.ML => Passed Test029.ML => Passed Test154.ML => Passed Test086.ML => Passed Test130.ML => Passed Test042.ML => Passed Test075.ML => Passed Test141.ML => Passed Test156.ML => Passed Test017.ML => Passed Test067.ML => Passed Test071.ML => Passed Test114.ML => Passed Test053.ML => Passed Test110.ML => Passed Test054.ML => Passed Test069.ML => Passed Test085.ML => Passed Test060.ML => Passed Test153.ML => Passed Test043.ML => Passed Test044.ML => Passed Test099.ML => Passed Test032.ML => Passed Test056.ML => Passed Test065.ML => Passed Test025.ML => Passed Test003.ML => Passed Test019.ML => Passed Test015.ML => Passed Test009.ML => Passed Test037.ML => Passed Test072.ML => Passed Test061.ML => Passed Test051.ML => Passed Test020.ML => Passed Test026.ML => Passed Test021.ML => Passed Test013.ML => Passed Test052.ML => Passed Test066.ML => Passed Test007.ML => Passed Test016.ML => Passed Test047.ML => Passed Test022.ML => Passed Test001.ML => Passed Test040.ML => Passed Test028.ML => Passed Test011.ML => Passed Test074.ML => Passed Test010.ML => Passed Test038.ML => Passed Test031.ML => Passed Test014.ML => Passed Test057.ML => Passed Test048.ML => Passed Test006.ML => Passed Test063.ML => Passed Test073.ML => Passed Test033.ML => Passed Test036.ML => Passed Test018.ML => Passed Test035.ML => Passed Test024.ML => Passed Test004.ML => Passed Test046.ML => Passed Test030.ML => Passed Test023.ML => Passed Test064.ML => Passed Test045.ML => Passed Test062.ML => Passed Test012.ML => Passed Test058.ML => Passed Test059.ML => Passed Test039.ML => Passed Test002.ML => Passed Test068.ML => Passed Test005.ML => Passed Test041.ML => Passed Test050.ML => Passed Test034.ML => Passed Test027.ML => Passed Test055.ML => Passed Test008.ML => Passed Test070.ML => Passed Test029.ML => Passed Test042.ML => Passed Test067.ML => Passed Test071.ML => Passed Test053.ML => Passed Test054.ML => Passed Test069.ML => Passed Test060.ML => Passed Test043.ML => Passed Test044.ML => Passed make[2]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[2]: *** [Makefile:1175: check-local] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[1]: *** [Makefile:997: check-am] Error 2 make: *** [Makefile:706: check-recursive] Error 1
It looks like every individual test passed, but the test suite as a whole failed. Do you have any idea what might cause this? Thank you,
On 16/05/2017 04:47, Jerry James wrote:
I attempted to build this version for Fedora. It succeeded on all architectures except aarch64:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=19526061
I don't understand the failure, though. We run "make check" after the build to gain some confidence that the build is good. Here is an extract from the build log (https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6133/19526133/build.log): Test044.ML => Passed make[2]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[2]: *** [Makefile:1175: check-local] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[1]: *** [Makefile:997: check-am] Error 2 make: *** [Makefile:706: check-recursive] Error 1
It looks like every individual test passed, but the test suite as a whole failed. Do you have any idea what might cause this? Thank you,
The only thing that occurs to me is that one or other of the tests messed up the internal state so that when the poly process came to exit it crashed. I don't have access to any machine running aarch64 (that's 64-bit ARM isn't it?) so there's no way I can test any of this.
Regards, David
Hi David,
Are you still updating the fixes-5.7 branch? It seems to me that this commit might be a bug fix worth including, though I'm not sure if it depends on new developments. https://github.com/polyml/polyml/commit/5ba42e588373bd3cd63b8cadb8c4cb8a349c...
Cheers, Ramana
On 17 May 2017 at 00:49, David Matthews <David.Matthews at prolingua.co.uk> wrote:
On 16/05/2017 04:47, Jerry James wrote:
I attempted to build this version for Fedora. It succeeded on all architectures except aarch64:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=19526061
I don't understand the failure, though. We run "make check" after the build to gain some confidence that the build is good. Here is an extract from the build log (https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6133/19526133/build.log): Test044.ML => Passed make[2]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[2]: *** [Makefile:1175: check-local] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[1]: *** [Makefile:997: check-am] Error 2 make: *** [Makefile:706: check-recursive] Error 1
It looks like every individual test passed, but the test suite as a whole failed. Do you have any idea what might cause this? Thank you,
The only thing that occurs to me is that one or other of the tests messed up the internal state so that when the poly process came to exit it crashed. I don't have access to any machine running aarch64 (that's 64-bit ARM isn't it?) so there's no way I can test any of this.
Regards, David
polyml mailing list polyml at inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/polyml
Hi Ramana, The fixes branches are useful in the early phase of the development cycle if bugs are found soon after a release. At some point it is no longer viable to keep back-porting especially if there is a risk that the fix itself may introduce bugs. This particular change was one of a number to make the thread system more resilient. At this point I'd suggest switching to Git master.
Regards, David
On 11/11/2017 07:15, Ramana Kumar wrote:
Hi David,
Are you still updating the fixes-5.7 branch? It seems to me that this commit might be a bug fix worth including, though I'm not sure if it depends on new developments. https://github.com/polyml/polyml/commit/5ba42e588373bd3cd63b8cadb8c4cb8a349c...
Cheers, Ramana
On 17 May 2017 at 00:49, David Matthews <David.Matthews at prolingua.co.uk> wrote:
On 16/05/2017 04:47, Jerry James wrote:
I attempted to build this version for Fedora. It succeeded on all architectures except aarch64:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=19526061
I don't understand the failure, though. We run "make check" after the build to gain some confidence that the build is good. Here is an extract from the build log (https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6133/19526133/build.log): Test044.ML => Passed make[2]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[2]: *** [Makefile:1175: check-local] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[1]: *** [Makefile:997: check-am] Error 2 make: *** [Makefile:706: check-recursive] Error 1
It looks like every individual test passed, but the test suite as a whole failed. Do you have any idea what might cause this? Thank you,
The only thing that occurs to me is that one or other of the tests messed up the internal state so that when the poly process came to exit it crashed. I don't have access to any machine running aarch64 (that's 64-bit ARM isn't it?) so there's no way I can test any of this.
Regards, David
polyml mailing list polyml at inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/polyml
OK, thanks.
My impression of Git master is that there is often work-in-progress that should not be expected to work. Is it useful to report bugs while development is still in progress? For example, trying it now I saw this: Fail "Exception- InternalError: codeToPRegRev raised while compiling"
On 11 November 2017 at 19:37, David Matthews <David.Matthews at prolingua.co.uk
wrote:
Hi Ramana, The fixes branches are useful in the early phase of the development cycle if bugs are found soon after a release. At some point it is no longer viable to keep back-porting especially if there is a risk that the fix itself may introduce bugs. This particular change was one of a number to make the thread system more resilient. At this point I'd suggest switching to Git master.
Regards, David
On 11/11/2017 07:15, Ramana Kumar wrote:
Hi David,
Are you still updating the fixes-5.7 branch? It seems to me that this commit might be a bug fix worth including, though I'm not sure if it depends on new developments. https://github.com/polyml/polyml/commit/5ba42e588373bd3cd63b 8cadb8c4cb8a349c7fff#diff-27af5828c397c28b2fdeacab709ccf57
Cheers, Ramana
On 17 May 2017 at 00:49, David Matthews <David.Matthews at prolingua.co.uk> wrote:
On 16/05/2017 04:47, Jerry James wrote:
I attempted to build this version for Fedora. It succeeded on all
architectures except aarch64:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=19526061
I don't understand the failure, though. We run "make check" after the build to gain some confidence that the build is good. Here is an extract from the build log (https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6133/19526133/build.log ): Test044.ML => Passed make[2]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[2]: *** [Makefile:1175: check-local] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/polyml-5.7' make[1]: *** [Makefile:997: check-am] Error 2 make: *** [Makefile:706: check-recursive] Error 1
It looks like every individual test passed, but the test suite as a whole failed. Do you have any idea what might cause this? Thank you,
The only thing that occurs to me is that one or other of the tests messed up the internal state so that when the poly process came to exit it crashed. I don't have access to any machine running aarch64 (that's 64-bit ARM isn't it?) so there's no way I can test any of this.
Regards, David
polyml mailing list polyml at inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/polyml
On 11/11/2017 10:41, Ramana Kumar wrote:
OK, thanks.
My impression of Git master is that there is often work-in-progress that should not be expected to work. Is it useful to report bugs while development is still in progress? For example, trying it now I saw this: Fail "Exception- InternalError: codeToPRegRev raised while compiling"
That is often true but at this point I'm trying to get the bugs out of it in order to prepare the release. So any bug reports are welcome.
Michael Norrish reported this exception on the mailing list a few days ago and I've haven't had time to look into it. If you have a piece of code that exhibits it then I would like to see it especially if you can cut it down to something manageable. Please send anything to me directly rather than through the mailing list.
Regards, David