[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#970336: ecl breaks cl-contextl autopkgtest: not of the expected type SYMBOL



Source: ecl, cl-contextl
Control: found -1 ecl/20.4.24+ds-1
Control: found -1 cl-contextl/1:20160313.git5894fba-1
Severity: serious
Tags: sid bullseye
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-ci@lists.debian.org
User: debian-ci@lists.debian.org
Usertags: breaks needs-update

Dear maintainer(s),

With a recent upload of ecl the autopkgtest of cl-contextl fails in
testing when that autopkgtest is run with the binary packages of ecl
from unstable. It passes when run with only packages from testing. In
tabular form:

                       pass            fail
ecl                    from testing    20.4.24+ds-1
cl-contextl            from testing    1:20160313.git5894fba-1
all others             from testing    from testing

I copied some of the output at the bottom of this report.

Currently this regression is blocking the migration of ecl to testing
[1]. Due to the nature of this issue, I filed this bug report against
both packages. Can you please investigate the situation and reassign the
bug to the right package?

More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation

Paul

[1] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=ecl

https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/amd64/c/cl-contextl/7008359/log.gz

;;;
;;; Compiling figure-editor-2.lisp.
;;; OPTIMIZE levels: Safety=2, Space=0, Speed=3, Debug=0
;;;
;;; End of Pass 1.
;;; Finished compiling figure-editor-2.lisp.
;;;
real time : 17.420 secs
run time  : 20.101 secs
gc count  : 612 times
consed    : 2707204576 bytes
real time : 18.996 secs
run time  : 21.757 secs
gc count  : 652 times
consed    : 2886437424 bytes

:DONE
:DONE An error occurred during initialization:
In function SYMBOL-VALUE, the value of the only argument is
  "Dr. Jekyll"
which is not of the expected type SYMBOL.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: