Re: bug#30680: [racket-users] Using Racket's raco on on Guix(SD)

[Timothy Sample]

Christopher Lemmer Webber <address@hidden> writes:

> Timothy Sample writes:
>
>> Christopher Lemmer Webber <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> Likewise, Gregor and Raart do not install:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>> This is a timezone issue.  The “tzinfo” package cannot find the
>> “zoneinfo” directory in GuixSD.  If you install the “tzdata” Racket
>> package, things seem to settle down.  (It would be better to tell
>> “tzinfo” to use the system database, but that’s harder to do.)
>
> Oh that's true.  I guess this was multiple issues.  Anyway, horray, that
> one seems ok now!

I’m glad to hear it!

>>> ... install raart, lots of "cannot open output file" error messages ...
>>> [...]
>>
>> I got better results with “raart” when “gcc-toolchain” was available
>> (i.e., “guix environment --ad-hoc gcc-toolchain”).  I guess it has to
>> compile a bit of native code, so it needs a compiler.  It still brakes
>> due to a syntax error, but I get the same error on Debian, so I guess
>> that’s something.  :)
>
> Yep... that seems to have fixed the install of that issue.

Cool!

>> Also, I checked all of this from Racket without grafts, and it never
>> complained about compiling OpenSSL stuff.  Running “raco setup” gives
>> some other errors, though.
>
> You're right... without grafts it doesn't have the openssl error.  The
> other writing to the store issues still seem to persist, but it doesn't
> block running "raco setup" (after a "raco pkg install", a step I had
> omitted earlier).

Okay.  I was confused about the “raco setup” example, but the other step
makes more sense now.

I will say that even on Debian, with an regular user, I have seen
“permission denied” errors because Racket tries to update files in
“/usr/share”.

> ISTM that this is a separate bug.  In fact I'm afraid I've polluted this
> bug with what I thought were all the same bug but turned out to be
> several different bugs, of which a couple are fixed now thanks to your
> help.
>
> PS: About the bounty, my thoughts are that some of these smaller issues
> being resolved are already worth a smaller amount of compensation (and
> thanks!), but there are *two different* larger issues of which probably
> either is worth the full amount (though I can only afford to pay for
> one)... one of them is the issue of the grafts breaking eg openssl
> (which maybe we should file as a separate bug?), and the other is this
> original bug (30680) about the attempts to compile to the store (which
> does not seem as big of a blocker as it did previously, but is still
> very annoying).  Does that seem fair?  (Feel free to contact me
> off-list.)

Actually I think there is only one bug, which is the grafts thing.  This
bug was originally about compiling OpenSSL files to the store.  Grafting
doesn’t break OpenSSL it just makes Racket try to recompile its OpenSSL
FFI wrappers.

I have a patch, too.  I sent it to guix-patches, but I must have made a
mistake because it ended up in bug-guix attached to this bug report.
The patch can be found at <https://debbugs.gnu.org/30680>.  Also, the
attachment didn’t get sent to the list, but did make it to the bug page.
Hm....  Sorry for the goof!