[ANNOUNCE] GHC 8.2.1 release candidate 2

[George Colpitts]

Done: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/13715#ticket

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:44 PM George Colpitts <george.colpitts at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Yes, I agree, will file a bug this evening.
>
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 10:26 AM Ben Gamari <ben at well-typed.com> wrote:
>
>> George Colpitts <george.colpitts at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > Hi Ben
>> >
>> > I built from source and ran the tests on my Mac and found some
>> > problems. I'm not sure if the failing tests have been ran successfully
>> > by others on this platform. I did "make slowtest". Maybe the problem
>> > only happens on my machine.
>> >
>> Currently Harbormaster only runs `make test`, not `make slowtest`.
>> Consequently, `slowtest` is generally rather broken, even on Linux.
>> Every once in a while I look at it and try to pare down the failures,
>> but it's an up-hill battle.
>>
>> > I'm new to running the testsuite and not sure how the sleep settings on
>> my
>> > computer affect long running computations.
>> >
>> >    - If I want to run a long running test such as "make slowtest"
>> overnight
>> >    will my computer go to sleep preventing the test from running? i.e.
>> should
>> >    I invoke it with something like "caffeinate -i make slowtest" ?
>> >
>> That sounds right to me.
>>
>> > I almost didn't run the tests assuming they had been run as part of the
>> > release process but then I guessed that maybe slowtest had not been
>> run. It
>> > would be a pain but would it be worth documenting which tests had been
>> run
>> > on which platforms?
>> >
>> I currently don't validate the binary distribution tarballs. Instead I
>> judge validation state from Harbormaster's testing of the ghc-8.2
>> branch.
>>
>> Over the summer we intend on revamping our CI infrastructure, which
>> should make it easier to do nightly runs of slowtest (and perhaps
>> provide nightly or even per-commit binary distributions).
>>
>> > I assume I should file a bug for the following?
>> >
>> That would be great. I had a quick look at this and it looks quite
>> likely that the simplifier is looping: even -fsimpl-tick-factor=1000
>> doesn't succeed. This looks like a real regression.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> - Ben
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20170517/78dd3875/attachment-0001.html>