Re: [gentoo-lisp] Ebuild for Racket 5.1

[Neil Funk]

I tested the new ebuild in the tree, with USE="X cairo foreign
(multilib) opengl -backtrace -cgc -doc futures places -plain -profile
-sgc -slatex -static" on ~amd64.
Worked (compiled) fine.

Next I enabled the "backtrace" flag - also worked fine.

But when I enabled the "profile" flag, the build hung as per my
previous post regarding 5.0.2. (Only it turns out that "profile" was
the culprit - the only one of those flags I didn't mention
originally.)  Last console message was "Compiling xform support...
Done making xform-collects."
lt-racketcgc taking up 100% CPU.



On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Cyprien Nicolas <c.nicolas@×××××.com> wrote:
> Hello lispers,
>
> I pushed an ebuild for racket-5.1 in the lisp overlay. I updated the
> patch, it is needed for plain install to work (i.e. to skip the
> compilation of rackets libraries, the long setup-racket phase).
>
> It has been lightly tested on my stable x86 laptop and stable
> amd64-multilib desktop. At least it compiles without failure.
>
> Here are a few comments and thoughts I want to share:
>
> * In 5.0.2, I sped up the "raco setup" phase by adding the -j options to
> the PLT_SETUP_OPTIONS. I added this to the install-cgc target in 5.1.
>
> * I renamed the desktop entry from DrScheme to DrRacket, as it's the new
> name of the IDE.
>
> * I removed the build directory, in favor of a build directly in the
> source directory. Such use of a build directory is not needed as the
> source code is removed after the merge, it avoids unnecessary copying of
> files.
>
> * 'slatex' nor 'static' USE flags have been enabled during my builds, so
> it may just work, or not.
>
>
> 1. Does enable cgc (or sgc) should disable the build for 3m? If not, we
> could add a default enabled 3m USE for building the 3m-gc-based racket
> (currently the default case). It is easy to add this possibility.
> I'm fine by just using 3m, I don't know if there is specific users needs.
>
> 2. A bug has been opened about racket and PaX, but I don't know anything
> about PaX, so I'll let somebody else to take care of the bug.
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=355285
>
> 3. If someone has a hint on how to fix/hide the
> "configure: WARNING: unrecognized options:"...
> I didn't look into it too much yet.
>
>
> Regards
> ,Cyprien
>
>
> PS: USE=cgc caused a high memory consumption on my desktop during the
> raco setup, one build has even been killed because my system ran out of
> memory, so use it with caution, or expect slow downs, if you don't
> have/use the autogroup scheduler :) (I don't have a tmpfs PORT_TMPDIR).
>
> PS2: Thanks to Morgon and Neil for their feedback. and Dimitri for the
> initial racket ebuild.
>
>
> On 02/22/2011 08:05 PM, Morgon Kanter wrote:
>> Not sure what's different between our systems, but I had both futures
>> and places available (though not backtrace) and my build went just
>> fine. Actually, my use flags were: X cairo doc foreign futures opengl
>> places (everything else was unset).
>>
>> Some of these flags need documentation.
>>
>> -- Morgon
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Neil Funk <infinitedowntime@×××××.com> wrote:
>>>> May I ask you which USE flags combination(s) you tried it with, and on
>>>> which arch?
>>>
>>> I'm on ~amd64.
>>> dev-scheme/racket-5.1 was built with the following:
>>> USE="X cairo foreign (multilib) opengl -backtrace -cgc -doc -futures
>>> -places -plain -profile -sgc -slatex -static"
>>>
>>> The only other suggestion I'd offer is regarding the backtrace,
>>> futures, and places flags.  At least on 5.0.2, one or more of these
>>> cause the build to hang forever at 100% CPU.  Only when I finally gave
>>> up and killed the build did I notice the ewarn that these flags can
>>> cause that.  I realize there's only so much we can protect people from
>>> themselves, but it would have been nice if it made me acknowledge that
>>> I intended to use a risky flag.  Ideally, we'd just fix whatever
>>> causes it to hang, but that's an upstream issue - could we maybe just
>>> mask those flags?  Although, I haven't tested them on 5.1 yet to see
>>> if they're even still a problem...
>>>
>>> Cyprien, I'd be happy to help test with other configurations.  Thanks
>>> for your work.
>>>
>>> -Neil
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Cyprien Nicolas <c.nicolas@×××××.com> wrote:
>>>> On 21/02/11 18:07, Morgon Kanter wrote:
>>>>> Hey folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed there wasn't yet an ebuild for the new version of Racket, so
>>>>> I went ahead and made one. It's attached.
>>>>>
>>>>> A couple changes besides just bumping the version number:
>>>>> * Doesn't really seem like that makefile patch was required anymore (I
>>>>> didn't need it), so I commented that out.
>>>>> * The new Racket GUI system doesn't appear to include any of those
>>>>> external libraries that the ebuild used to issue an "rm" for, so I
>>>>> removed those bits from the ebuild (as well as the formerly
>>>>> commented-out rm commands that were replaced by something different).
>>>>>
>>>>> That's it for the changes, aside from a version bump.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> -- Morgon
>>>>
>>>> Actually, there is a work-in-progress ebuild, but I didn't had the time
>>>> to test it intensively, especially with the cgc and sgc garbage
>>>> collectors, and the plain USE flags (as the makefile patch is related to
>>>> those USEs), and I just it an "emake failed" with USE=plain.
>>>>
>>>> Apart from some cosmetic changes (EAPI4, REAUIRED_USE="cgc? ( !sgc )",
>>>> some spacing) my ebuild is the same :)
>>>>
>>>> May I ask you which USE flags combination(s) you tried it with, and on
>>>> which arch? (applies for Neil too).
>>>> Thanks for the feedback
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> ,Cyprien
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>