> On May 28, 2015, at 1:53 PM, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Wed, 27 May 2015 08:34:11 -0700 (PDT), N N > <nawar.noo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I've been trying to set up Racket for evaluation purposes and due to being >> on CentOS with no root privileges, I've chosen the Racket minimal >> distribution. >> >> I was able to compile it from source and run it and wanted to manually >> install xrepl for an improved interpreter experience. I found the package on >> GitHub and downloaded it. >> >> However, I've not been able to install it using raco. I was advised to call >> "raco pkg install --link <path_to_package>", however that fails with: >> >> call-with-file-lock/timeout: contract violation >> expected: (>=/c 0.0) >> given: -1202590842.0 >> context...: >> /home/user/Applications/Racket/share/racket/collects/racket/file.rkt:298:0: >> call-with-file-lock/timeout35 >> /home/user/Applications/Racket/share/racket/collects/pkg/main.rkt:167:14 >> (submod /home/user/Applications/Racket/share/racket/collects/pkg/main.rkt >> main): [running body] >> /home/user/Applications/Racket/share/racket/collects/pkg/raco.rkt: >> [traversing imports] >> /home/user/Applications/Racket/share/racket/collects/raco/raco.rkt: >> [running body] >> /home/user/Applications/Racket/share/racket/collects/raco/main.rkt: >> [running body] >> >> I'm on CentOS 5.10, no root privileges and we use the NFS protocol (I >> suspect it's possibly related to that). Any call involving 'install' also >> fails in a similar fashion. >> >> Interestingly, when I was trying to compile the full version, I was >> occasionally running into the same problem and was having to restart the >> compile as it was taking a really long time. In the end I got frustrated and >> went for the minimal distribution. >> >> I've never had that problem compiling anything else before (vim being a >> recent example). >> >> Thanks.
… lots of helpful stuff omitted... > I did see the message from John Clements. I'm not a Racket developer, > but superficially it appears to me that the negative delay values John > found should be causing errors on every platform that supports file > locking [which is every supported platform]. Clearly they aren't, so > now I am wondering whether locking actually is enabled and being used > for local filesystems. I don’t think I would interpret my message in that way. Specifically, I was unable to find a call to that function that specified those values (delay or max-delay) at all. However, I was exploring using github, and didn’t take the time to actually download the 6.1.1 tarball. My guess (and it’s just a guess) is that there is such a call, and that the problem does ultimately stem from some problem that’s specific to NFS. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
