From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Oct 21 10:32:37 2020 Received: (at 44112) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Oct 2020 14:32:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50170 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kVFAK-0003J7-UV for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 10:32:37 -0400 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:47957) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kVFAJ-0003ED-0G for 44112@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 10:32:35 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 90.92.160.122 Received: from mimimi (lfbn-idf2-1-1094-122.w90-92.abo.wanadoo.fr [90.92.160.122]) (Authenticated sender: mail@ambrevar.xyz) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 384B2E0014; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:32:26 +0000 (UTC) From: Pierre Neidhardt To: Guillaume Le Vaillant , zimoun Subject: Re: SBCL is not reproducible In-Reply-To: <87wnzjzr77.fsf@yamatai> References: <86o8kw80bl.fsf@gmail.com> <87wnzjzr77.fsf@yamatai> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:32:26 +0200 Message-ID: <87v9f3zm2t.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 2.5 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Guillaume Le Vaillant writes: > IIRC, SBCL itself is built in 2 stages. First its core is compiled > using another Common Lisp implementation (currently clisp in Guix), then > the complete SBCL is compiled using the core compiled [...] Content analysis details: (2.5 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [217.70.183.196 listed in wl.mailspike.net] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs [URI: ambrevar.xyz (xyz)] 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders 0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD From abused NTLD X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44112 Cc: 44112@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.5 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Guillaume Le Vaillant writes: > IIRC, SBCL itself is built in 2 stages. First its core is compiled > using another Common Lisp implementation (currently clisp in Guix), then > the complete SBCL is compiled using the core compiled [...] Content analysis details: (2.5 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [217.70.183.196 listed in wl.mailspike.net] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs [URI: ambrevar.xyz (xyz)] 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders 0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD From abused NTLD -1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list manager 1.0 BULK_RE_SUSP_NTLD Precedence bulk and RE: from a suspicious TLD --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Guillaume Le Vaillant writes: > IIRC, SBCL itself is built in 2 stages. First its core is compiled > using another Common Lisp implementation (currently clisp in Guix), then > the complete SBCL is compiled using the core compiled in stage 1. Yes, this is correct. =2D-=20 Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/ --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQFGBAEBCAAwFiEEUPM+LlsMPZAEJKvom9z0l6S7zH8FAl+QRnoSHG1haWxAYW1i cmV2YXIueHl6AAoJEJvc9Jeku8x/QpAH/jDzZbTf5c7Q9zoLt1O/TGkZkDfIXxqV g/mM32PO9o1w9oSepAHxSC3uubcXi+kx7FhIdOhHKKFOtARx+mqTElH5qq1N3OGs AaKDEuy6lPY/kijbEHsy1FHZw5Swvww6Vf0qwHkp8CFFGdr9jEh57LMf1TQ1T+hc pWbUJ9yAuVhNUhX0Fa82cqiah0dB9QWO0/NXPM9VZU5asvs1Yt1DzreeAVpFFb/e 6OZYfq/q3nlBNYyORupj1aN+Z4+aUr4kr6L9CvmKb+Yy/cJJd5fUIsjgt09QcWem JZrQ/3I6/MUhJgMxY7xr2L/IIZ3VFm6C2wrcg5DReMOofb/MxJ71DGM= =0cXn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--