[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Guile 3.0.7 compile cache messages

From: Chris Vine
Subject: Re: Guile 3.0.7 compile cache messages
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 17:53:33 +0100

On Wed,  2 Jun 2021 12:20:48 +0000
Zelphir Kaltstahl <> wrote:
> Hi Chris!
> On 6/2/21 12:30 PM, Chris Vine wrote:
> > On Wed,  2 Jun 2021 08:52:54 +0000
> > Zelphir Kaltstahl <> wrote:
> >> On 6/2/21 8:00 AM, Adriano Peluso wrote:
> >>> Il giorno mar, 01/06/2021 alle 08.14 -0400, Olivier Dion via General
> >>> Guile related discussions ha scritto:
> >>>> On Mon, 31 May 2021, Zelphir Kaltstahl <>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> Hello Guile Users!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It seems my Guile (version 3.0.7, installed via GNU Guile, updated
> >>>>> today) is
> >>>>> doing something weird, or perhaps something correct but unexpected
> >>>>> with regard
> >>>>> to informing about it finding compile caches. When I run a program
> >>>>> with `guile
> >>>>> -L . main.scm`, it displays the following:
> >>>> I also find it annoying.  I use Guile as a script language for a
> >>>> video game engine in C.  This interferes with the logging system and it
> >>>> annoys the hell out of me >:-)
> >>> Does this bug help anyone of you ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >> To be honest my need is not as urgent as something failing because of the
> >> messages, but rather a visual annoyance, that did not happen before. When 
> >> I do
> >> not expect a recompilation, because I did not change any code, then it is
> >> surprising to see the cache messages appearing, even with auto compilation
> >> switched off. For a moment I think: "Huh? Did something change?" and then 
> >> "Ah,
> >> it is only those always shown messages.". It did not use to do that.
> >>
> >> I am not sure what changed in my setting or with GNU Guile. My theory is, 
> >> that
> >> it is something introduced between 3.0.5 (or 4?) and 3.0.7 perhaps. Or that
> >> something was changed in the way that GNU Guix installs GNU Guile and that
> >> affects the caching messages somehow.
> > You reported that when running  a program file of yours named 'main.scm'
> > which is in your project's source directory, you get this message:
> >
> > $ guile -L . main.scm 
> > ;;; note: source file ./logging.scm
> > ;;;       newer than compiled 
> > /home/user/.guix-profile/lib/guile/3.0/site-ccache/logging.go
> > ;;; found fresh local cache at 
> > /home/user/.cache/guile/ccache/3.0-LE-8-4.5/home/user/dev/guile/lf2-data-files/logging.scm.go
> > ;;; note: source file ./file-reader.scm
> > ;;;       newer than compiled 
> > /home/user/.guix-profile/lib/guile/3.0/site-ccache/file-reader.go
> > ;;; found fresh local cache at 
> > /home/user/.cache/guile/ccache/3.0-LE-8-4.5/home/user/dev/guile/lf2-data-files/file-reader.scm.go
> > 160
> >
> > On the face of it the warnings look reasonable and I would be surprised
> > if they were something new.  You appear to have two module files
> > logging.scm and file-reader.scm in your project's source directory
> > /home/user/dev/guile/lf2-data-files which are newer than
> > pre-compiled .go files for them which you (or guix on your behalf) have
> > installed at some time in the past in guile-3.0's site-ccache,
> > presumably by some kind of 'make install' operation carried out for
> > your project.  When you updated logging.scm and file-reader.scm in your
> > project, guile noticed this, recompiled the modules for you
> > automatically and put the generated code in your local cache
> > directory.  It now emits helpful warnings in consequence.
> Yes, the warnings would look reasonable, if they only were shown once every
> change. However, what confuses me about them is, that no matter how often I 
> run
> the same program without changing any code (!), the same messages are shown, 
> as
> if there was constantly a newer version than the cache. If I understand the
> messages correctly, that is.
> (I do not doubt, that the messages can be helpful, in cases, where there 
> really
> is a newer version than the cache.)
If you have (i) stale compiled bytecode files installed by guix in
site-ccache, and (ii) up-to-date bytecode files installed by guile in
local cache, then you will necessarily get the warning each time, and I
wouldn't want it to behave in any other way.  You need to resolve the
matter either by (i) removing the stale bytecode files in site-ccache,
or (ii) removing the bytecode files in local cache, recompiling your
project and reinstalling up-to-day bytecode files in site-ccache.

> In this project I do not have any makefile yet and it is a pure GNU Guile
> project. Link:
> <>.

Presumably guix is doing this then.

What presumably guix has done is to install the bytecode files in
site-ccache when first building and installing your project but then
failed to update them when you change some of your source code files.
Is there a guix support group, or some kind of documentation about this?
This is pretty basic stuff so there must be some way of getting guix to
behave correctly.  Is there some simple command like "guix rebuild"
that you are supposed to use?

> > The question is how did you get into this position?  More particulaly,
> > what installed logging.go and file-reader.go in site-ccache (presumably
> > 'make install') and, when logging.scm and file-reader.scm were updated,
> > why didn't you recompile and reinstall your modules?
> I am not sure. I am merely calling `guile -L . main` in the project root
> directory and have not had any other call to it, when I noticed this 
> behavior. I
> basically did not do anything special before.

See above.  Running 'guile -L . main'  will not install anything in
site-ccache, so something else (most likely guix) has done that.
Instead, guile run as 'guile -L . main' will cause it to save its
compiled bytecode in local cache.

I suppose one other point to address is why you are using guix at all.
If all you want to do is run your program with 'guile -L . main' then
that is all you need to do.  What are you trying to achieve with guix?
Aren't you supposed to run your program within the guix environment
instead of outside it?

> > The most immediate solution is to delete your local cache and reinstall
> > your program modules.  Alternatively, I suspect from your comments that
> > your normal work methods may be better served by not pre-compiling/
> > installing the modules at all, and instead rely on their automatic
> > compilation and installation into the local cache by guile on need.
> How do I go about it? Simply removing the cache folder the messages point to?
> And what commands would that alternative workflow entail?

Dunno.  See above.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]