;;; versions which break binary compatibility. But it certainly should
;;; be incremented for release versions which break binary
;;; compatibility.
-(def!constant +fasl-file-version+ 66)
+(def!constant +fasl-file-version+ 67)
;;; (record of versions before 2003 deleted in 2003-04-26/0.pre8.107 or so)
;;; 38: (2003-01-05) changed names of internal SORT machinery
;;; 39: (2003-02-20) in 0.7.12.1 a slot was added to
;;; x86-64. Also (belatedly) PPC/gencgc, including :gencgc on FPAFF.
;;; 65: (2006-04-11) Package locking interface changed.
;;; 66: (2006-05-13) Fopcompiler
+;;; 67: (2006-07-25) Reports on #lisp about 0.9.13 fasls being invalid on
+;;; 0.9.14.something
;;; the conventional file extension for our fasl files
(declaim (type simple-string *fasl-file-type*))
;;; checkins which aren't released. (And occasionally for internal
;;; versions, especially for internal versions off the main CVS
;;; branch, it gets hairier, e.g. "0.pre7.14.flaky4.13".)
-"0.9.14.30"
+"0.9.14.31"