GNU bug report logs - #43960
incompatible bytecode version

Previous Next

Full log

Message #48 received at 43960-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 43960-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Дмитрий Поляков
 <liltechdude <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#43960: incompatible bytecode version
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 01:18:14 -0500

Hello,

zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 09:53, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> I don’t think it’s a reasonable response: it’s a fact that we naturally
>> tend to read manuals sparsely, at best.
>>
>> Since the pastes vanished, how did ‘sudo guix pull’ lead to incompatible
>> bytecode warnings?
>
> If I remember correctly (which is neither a reasonable response :-)), it
> should highly come from the user config.  And the investigation needs
> more information, e.g., as Tobias asks: the output of:
>
>   $ type guix
>   $ ls -l ~/.config/guix/current
>   $ sudo rm ~/.config/guix/current
>   $ /run/current-system/profile/bin/guix pull
>   $ hash guix
>   $ type guix

Yes, and we haven't gotten any of that information in a year.

Дмитрий, I'll close this old report which I don't see actionable, but if
you get hit by the problem again, it'd be helpful if you could capture
the above detail and what led you to the problem.

Thanks!

Maxim

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.