[M3devel] Release Engineering: 5.8 --> 5.9? was: Re: release vs. head?

[Daniel Alejandro Benavides D.]

Hi:
this problem was present in the code since some time ago, even before merge original cvsup sources in cm3 tree. You could see a how to repeat detailed here:
http://aivwiki.alma.cl/index.php/Installing_CVSup
This wiki entry has more than a year of existence.
I couldn't deep more because because some time ago I repeated the sequence and got the same result (first try works, and background doesn't). But not too long ago I repeated and got even worse the first attempt (non-background process didn't work) neither background so I just guessed something could be wrong on both cases with LINUXLIBC6 systems.

Please could you give me some pointers to build CM3 system with user threads on AMD64_LINUX or LINUXLIBC6 to see if this repeats 

Thanks in advance

--- El dom, 17/1/10, Tony Hosking <hosking at cs.purdue.edu> escribió:

> De: Tony Hosking <hosking at cs.purdue.edu>
> Asunto: Re: [M3devel] Release Engineering: 5.8 --> 5.9? was: Re: release vs. head?
> Para: "Jay K" <jay.krell at cornell.edu>
> CC: "m3devel" <m3devel at elegosoft.com>
> Fecha: domingo, 17 de enero, 2010 11:13
> On 17 Jan
> 2010, at 08:42, Jay K
> wrote:
> We can stick
> with the current release branch if that is indeed much
> easier.
> 
> 
> I thought there was some agreement we shouldn't release
> LONGINT as it was.
> 
> Indeed!
> I can undo the
> changes if we want.
> It's not easy with cvs (not much is) but I can do it.
> It's easy for me to diff the trees, just using windiff
> or diff (again, cvs
> seems not to help).
> 
> Surely we can move forward on this.
> Many/most/all of
> the fixes went first into head, so there's
> "nothing" to merge back,
> but diff tells us better.
> 
> I agree.
> I'm still
> planning on setting up some more machines and can do
> FreeBSD4.
> (I have PPC64_DARWIN and PPC32_OPENBSD about ready, but
> I have to check if Modula-3 actually works on them
> first...)
> 
> Let's not worry about additional
> targets. 
> Does anyone have
> the missing steps for the cvsup bug report, like the
> configuration file,
> can show the callstacks, try it with user threads..etc..?
> 
> Maybe cvsup should not be part of the
> release?
> 
> 
>  - Jay
> 
> 
> > Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:38:16 +0100
> > From: wagner at elegosoft.com
> > To: m3devel at elegosoft.com
> > Subject: [M3devel] Release Engineering: 5.8 -->
> 5.9? was: Re: release	vs.	head?
> > 
> > Quoting Jay K <jay.krell at cornell.edu>:
> > 
> > > Should we just make a new release branch?
> > > Or I keep copying stuff over somewhat
> selectively?
> > > We do want LONGCARD in the release, I assume.
> > >
> > > I'll diff the two trees again, see what
> varies.
> > > Sometimes when I do that I find stuff to take.
> > > And take the LONGCARD changes.
> > 
> > From a release engineering point of view this is more
> or less
> > a nightmare. We cannot make incompatible extensions to
> the feature
> > set after the fourth release candidate.
> > 
> > The only clean way I'd see to even get the LONGINT
> changes into the
> > next release would be to start anew. Meaning declaring
> 5.8.4 as
> > the latest release and develop 5.9 on the trunk. Of
> course we'd
> > have to carefully merge back any fixes that might be
> missing on the
> > trunk right now.
> > 
> > That said, I have currently neither the time nor the
> energy to do all
> > that cleanly. I didn't even get round to set up
> release builds
> > on new.elego.de via Hudson in
> order to cover the FreeBSD4 target
> > platform we recently lost in the release due to my
> home machine's
> > complete crash in December. So the release engineering
> support is not
> > in the best of states I must admit.
> > 
> > I could live with declaring 5.8.RC4 as an intermediate
> release,
> > but somebody really needs to do all the housekeeping
> of comparing
> > and merging branches. And we shouldn't start a new
> release branch
> > until things have settled down.
> > 
> > Is anybody interested in taking over some of the
> release engineering
> > tasks (including Hudson management and re-targeting to
> the new release)?
> > 
> > Please keep in mind that we haven't managed to get
> out a stable release
> > for several years now.
> > 
> > Olaf
> > -- 
> > Olaf Wagner -- elego Software Solutions GmbH
> > Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25 / Gebäude 12, 13355 Berlin,
> Germany
> > phone: +49 30 23 45 86 96 mobile: +49 177 2345 869
> fax: +49 30 23 45 86 95
> > http://www.elegosoft.com |
> Geschäftsführer: Olaf Wagner | Sitz: Berlin
> > Handelregister: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 77719 |
> USt-IdNr: DE163214194
> > 
> 
>