bug#43960: closed (incompatible bytecode version)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 21 Nov 2021 01:18:14 -0500
with message-id <87ee7ac9qx.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
and subject line Re: bug#43960: incompatible bytecode version
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #43960,
regarding incompatible bytecode version
to be marked as done.

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


-- 
43960: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=43960
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems

--- Begin Message --- Subject: incompatible bytecode version Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:24:06 +0530

;;; In procedure load-thunk-from-memory: incompatible bytecode version

;;; WARNING: loading compiled file /run/current-system/profile/lib/guile/3.0/site-ccache/gnu/packages/mtools.go failed:

;;; In procedure load-thunk-from-memory: incompatible bytecode version

;;; WARNING: loading compiled file /gnu/store/kn4sqrhnbklqii9ac0xbljkhwg3p2g1m-guix-module-union/lib/guile/3.0/site-ccache/guix.go failed:

;;; In procedure load-thunk-from-memory: incompatible bytecode version

;;; WARNING: loading compiled file /run/current-system/profile/lib/guile/3.0/site-ccache/guix.go failed:

;;; In procedure load-thunk-from-memory: incompatible bytecode version

;;; WARNING: loading compiled file /gnu/store/kn4sqrhnbklqii9ac0xbljkhwg3p2g1m-guix-module-union/lib/guile/3.0/site-ccache/guix/monad-repl.go failed:

;;; In procedure load-thunk-from-memory: incompatible bytecode version

;;; WARNING: loading compiled file /run/current-system/profile/lib/guile/3.0/site-ccache/guix/monad-repl.go failed:

;;; In procedure load-thunk-from-memory: incompatible bytecode version

Backtrace:

          19 (_ #<procedure 7f562e23f6c0 at ice-9/eval.scm:330:13 ()> …)

          18 (_ #<procedure 7f562e23f3e0 at ice-9/eval.scm:330:13 ()> …)

In ice-9/eval.scm:

   191:27 17 (_ #(#(#<directory (guix store) 7f5643a77000> #<pr…>) …))

   196:35 16 (_ #(#(#(#<directory (guix store) 7f5643a77000> …) #) #))

   298:34 15 (_ #(#(#(#<directory (guix channels) 7f563d5da140>) …) …))

In ice-9/boot-9.scm:

   2806:4 14 (save-module-excursion _)

    152:2 13 (with-fluid* _ _ _)

In unknown file:

          12 (primitive-load "/gnu/store/72dq02lisz4w74iphp4a8agjsp0…")

In ice-9/eval.scm:

   626:19 11 (_ #<directory (build-self) 7f563c4778c0>)

   293:34 10 (_ #<directory (build-self) 7f563c4778c0>)

   293:34  9 (_ #(#(#<directory (gnu packages) 7f563f504640>) "gu…" …))

    619:8  8 (_ #(#(#(#<directory (gnu packages) 7f563f504640>) …) #))

   626:19  7 (_ #(#(#(#<directory (gnu packages) 7f563f504640>) …) #))

   293:34  6 (_ #(#(#(#<directory (guix memoization) 7f5643…> …) …) …))

In ice-9/boot-9.scm:

  1731:15  5 (with-exception-handler #<procedure 7f56238671b0 at ic…> …)

In ice-9/eval.scm:

    619:8  4 (_ #(#(#(#<directory (gnu packages) 7f563f504640> #)) #))

   626:19  3 (_ #(#(#(#<directory (gnu packages) 7f563f504640> #)) #))

In unknown file:

           2 (load-compiled/vm "/home/lil/.config/guix/current/lib/g…")

In ice-9/boot-9.scm:

  1669:16  1 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _)

  1669:16  0 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _)

 

ice-9/boot-9.scm:1669:16: In procedure raise-exception:

In procedure load-thunk-from-memory: incompatible bytecode version

--- End Message ---

> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#43960: incompatible bytecode version
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 21 Nov 2021 01:18:14 -0500
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 09:53, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@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
>
>
> --- End Message ---