GNU bug report logs - #72582
[PATCH 0/2] gnu: racket: Update to 8.14.

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Philip McGrath <philip <at> philipmcgrath.com>

Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2024 20:38:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Merged with 72742

Done: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#72582: closed ([PATCH 0/2] gnu: racket: Update to 8.14.)
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 11:48:02 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Your message dated Thu, 22 Aug 2024 12:47:03 +0100
with message-id <87v7zsok3s.fsf <at> cbaines.net>
and subject line Re: [bug#72582] [PATCH 0/2] gnu: racket: Update to 8.14.
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #72582,
regarding [PATCH 0/2] gnu: racket: Update to 8.14.
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
72582: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=72582
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems
[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: Philip McGrath <philip <at> philipmcgrath.com>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] gnu: racket: Update to 8.14.
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2024 16:37:04 -0400
Hi,

The first patch here updates Racket to 8.14.

Efraim, the second patch is the reason I'm CC'ing you in particular: I hadn't
noticed your commit 0c96f7932de50c81f4b4714f287520699107c8bb until now. The
native trv64le backend is definitely supported for riscv64-linux (it is
working in the Debian packaging, for example [1]), so whatever problem you
encountered is almost certainly a bug either in the Guix packaging or in some
unusual pathway of Racket's build scripts that we're excercising. Do you have
any details about the error you got? Does it still happen with the proposed
revert? Unfortunately I don't have riscv64 hardware myself.

Thanks,
Philip

[1]: https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=racket&arch=riscv64&ver=8.13%2Bdfsg1-2&stamp=1718018079&raw=0

Philip McGrath (2):
  gnu: racket: Update to 8.14.
  Revert "gnu: chez-scheme-for-racket: Fix building on riscv64-linux."

 gnu/packages/chez.scm   |  7 +++----
 gnu/packages/racket.scm | 32 ++++++++++++++++----------------
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)


base-commit: de714bcb46d61922e0efc10783ea23fb0202f583
-- 
2.45.2



[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
To: Philip McGrath <philip <at> philipmcgrath.com>
Cc: 72582-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#72582] [PATCH 0/2] gnu: racket: Update to 8.14.
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 12:47:03 +0100
[Message part 4 (text/plain, inline)]
Philip McGrath <philip <at> philipmcgrath.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> The first patch here updates Racket to 8.14.
>
> Efraim, the second patch is the reason I'm CC'ing you in particular: I hadn't
> noticed your commit 0c96f7932de50c81f4b4714f287520699107c8bb until now. The
> native trv64le backend is definitely supported for riscv64-linux (it is
> working in the Debian packaging, for example [1]), so whatever problem you
> encountered is almost certainly a bug either in the Guix packaging or in some
> unusual pathway of Racket's build scripts that we're excercising. Do you have
> any details about the error you got? Does it still happen with the proposed
> revert? Unfortunately I don't have riscv64 hardware myself.
>
> Thanks,
> Philip
>
> [1]: https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=racket&arch=riscv64&ver=8.13%2Bdfsg1-2&stamp=1718018079&raw=0
>
> Philip McGrath (2):
>   gnu: racket: Update to 8.14.
>   Revert "gnu: chez-scheme-for-racket: Fix building on riscv64-linux."
>
>  gnu/packages/chez.scm   |  7 +++----
>  gnu/packages/racket.scm | 32 ++++++++++++++++----------------
>  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
>
> base-commit: de714bcb46d61922e0efc10783ea23fb0202f583

I've gone ahead and pushed these patches as
14e3b08f0012269984b26729f476a7cd1c1ec3bc. The build farm is slowly
catching up with riscv64-linux, so hopefully we'll be able to test
things more systematically soon.

Thanks,

Chris
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

This bug report was last modified 323 days ago.

Previous Next


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