-;;; A slightly more complex MACROLET case. In the body of the macro X
-;;; should not be lexically bound. In the body of the macrolet form itself
-;;; X should be bound. Note that THIS CASE WILL CAUSE AN ERROR when it
-;;; tries to macroexpand the call to FOO.
-
-#+nil ; FIXME: broken under 0.pre7.15
+;;; The original PCL documentation for this test said
+;;; A slightly more complex MACROLET case. In the body of the macro
+;;; X should not be lexically bound. In the body of the macrolet
+;;; form itself X should be bound. Note that THIS CASE WILL CAUSE AN
+;;; ERROR when it tries to macroexpand the call to FOO.
+;;;
+;;; This test is commented out in SBCL because ANSI says, in the
+;;; definition of the special operator MACROLET,
+;;; The macro-expansion functions defined by MACROLET are defined
+;;; in the lexical environment in which the MACROLET form appears.
+;;; Declarations and MACROLET and SYMBOL-MACROLET definitions affect
+;;; the local macro definitions in a MACROLET, but the consequences
+;;; are undefined if the local macro definitions reference any
+;;; local variable or function bindings that are visible in that
+;;; lexical environment.
+;;; Since the behavior is undefined, anything we do conforms.:-|
+;;; This is of course less than ideal; see bug 124.
+#+nil