From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Aug 11 17:55:37 2018 Received: (at 30680) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Aug 2018 21:55:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48419 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fobrE-00034M-Rw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 17:55:37 -0400 Received: from dustycloud.org ([50.116.34.160]:55440) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fobrA-00034C-Qa for 30680@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 17:55:33 -0400 Received: from jasmine (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dustycloud.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A382A266A0; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 17:55:31 -0400 (EDT) References: <87d0xn24d9.fsf@dustycloud.org> <0990d521-934b-069b-3f29-faf8a22a5bd0@fastmail.net> <87wosxexu7.fsf@dustycloud.org> <87h8k0d54i.fsf@ngyro.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.0; emacs 26.1 From: Christopher Lemmer Webber To: Timothy Sample Subject: Re: bug#30680: [racket-users] Using Racket's raco on on Guix(SD) In-reply-to: <87h8k0d54i.fsf@ngyro.com> Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 17:55:31 -0400 Message-ID: <87va8gfu0c.fsf@dustycloud.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 30680 Cc: Konrad Hinsen , help-guix , 30680@debbugs.gnu.org, racket-users@googlegroups.com X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Timothy Sample writes: > Christopher Lemmer Webber writes: > >> Konrad Hinsen writes: >> >>> In my tests, all packages ended up working, but performance is indeed >>> worse than with a Racket installation outside of Guix. >>> >>> It would be nice if someone with more knowledge of Racket internals >>> could give a hint or two for debugging this issue! >>> >>> Konrad. >> >> I'm posting a bug bounty on this issue: if someone can fix this I will >> pay them $250 USD. I don't have the time or knowledge enough of Racket >> internals to do so myself. > > I have discovered a few things, but I=E2=80=99m not sure how to fix the > underlying problem(s). > > The reason Racket is trying to recompile the OpenSSL files is because of > a hash mismatch. This can be seen by enabling debugging output: > > $ PLTSTDERR=3Ddebug raco setup openssl > > Which says a lot of things, but most interestingly it says: > > -------------------------------- > ... > compiler/cm: checking: /gnu/store/jx0bkmaafb8fq0mqs5ywgnxq8rbpn8j1-racket= -6.12/share/racket/collects/openssl/libcrypto.rkt > compiler/cm: different src hash... (5d9ca57f3e267d956c7b5e62578467beb8ccc= 1d2 4d21ac412723fbf33f97669c2f73f0e9367f4510) > compiler/cm: maybe-compile-zo starting /gnu/store/jx0bkmaafb8fq0mqs5ywgnx= q8rbpn8j1-racket-6.12/share/racket/collects/openssl/libcrypto.rkt > compiler/cm: start-compile: /gnu/store/jx0bkmaafb8fq0mqs5ywgnxq8rbpn8j1= -racket-6.12/share/racket/collects/openssl/libcrypto.rkt > compiler/cm: compiling /gnu/store/jx0bkmaafb8fq0mqs5ywgnxq8rbpn8j1-rack= et-6.12/share/racket/collects/openssl/libcrypto.rkt > open-output-file: cannot open output file > path: /gnu/store/jx0bkmaafb8fq0mqs5ywgnxq8rbpn8j1-racket-6.12/share/rac= ket/collects/openssl/compiled/tmp15340167971534016797570 > system error: Read-only file system; errno=3D30 > context...: > ... > -------------------------------- > > This hash mismatch is caused by grafting. When the package is built, > the path to OpenSSL gets hard-coded in a source file. The SHA-1 hash > for this file is stored in its =E2=80=9C.dep=E2=80=9D file. When the out= put is > grafted, the source file gets updated with a new OpenSSL path, but the > hash does not get updated. This makes Racket think that the cached > bytecode file is incorrect (even though it was likely grafted too), > and it tries to recompile it. It fails because it tries to write this > new bytecode file to the store. Interesting... I hadn't even considered grafting. (I still wonder why it's even trying to open *any* file in the store for output though...) > I double checked this by trying with an ungrafted Racket, and got better > results. (There was still a warning about writing to the store, but it > seemed less significant.) Cool! > The only thing I can think of for a fix would be to patch Racket to be > more lenient with bytecode files in the store. That is, ignore hash > mismatches in store-files. I might give this a try later tonight if > nobody has any better ideas. > > -- Tim BTW, some examples of packages where I've had trouble, in case it helps with testing: - Raart - Gregor - crypto (seemed to work last time, not sure why it wasn't working before) Though at this point I also can't do just "raco setup" on a local package either, but maybe resolving this issue will fix that.