Error Precompiling PyPlot in latest Julia 1.0.0-rc1.1


#1

I just installed the latest Julia 1.0.0-rc1.1 and stumbled upon the following errors when installing PyPlot:

julia> using PyPlot
[ Info: Precompiling PyPlot [d330b81b-6aea-500a-939a-2ce795aea3ee]
WARNING: could not import Base.done into PyCall
WARNING: could not import Base.mimewritable into PyPlot
WARNING: could not import Base.linspace into Colors
ERROR: LoadError: UndefVarError: done not defined
Stacktrace:
 [1] getproperty(::Module, ::Symbol) at .\sysimg.jl:13
 [2] top-level scope at none:0
 [3] include at .\boot.jl:317 [inlined]
 [4] include_relative(::Module, ::String) at .\loading.jl:1038
 [5] include(::Module, ::String) at .\sysimg.jl:29
 [6] top-level scope at none:2
 [7] eval at .\boot.jl:319 [inlined]
 [8] eval(::Expr) at .\client.jl:389
 [9] top-level scope at .\none:3
in expression starting at C:\Users\Seif\.julia\packages\LaTeXStrings\qycA\src\LaTeXStrings.jl:64
ERROR: LoadError: Failed to precompile LaTeXStrings [b964fa9f-0449-5b57-a5c2-d3ea65f4040f] to C:\Users\Seif\.julia\compiled\v1.0\LaTeXStrings\H4HGh.ji.
Stacktrace:
 [1] error(::String) at .\error.jl:33
 [2] macro expansion at .\logging.jl:313 [inlined]
 [3] compilecache(::Base.PkgId, ::String) at .\loading.jl:1184
 [4] _require(::Base.PkgId) at .\logging.jl:311
 [5] require(::Base.PkgId) at .\loading.jl:852
 [6] macro expansion at .\logging.jl:311 [inlined]
 [7] require(::Module, ::Symbol) at .\loading.jl:834
 [8] include at .\boot.jl:317 [inlined]
 [9] include_relative(::Module, ::String) at .\loading.jl:1038
 [10] include(::Module, ::String) at .\sysimg.jl:29
 [11] top-level scope at none:2
 [12] eval at .\boot.jl:319 [inlined]
 [13] eval(::Expr) at .\client.jl:389
 [14] top-level scope at .\none:3
in expression starting at C:\Users\Seif\.julia\packages\PyPlot\jXCX\src\PyPlot.jl:295
ERROR: Failed to precompile PyPlot [d330b81b-6aea-500a-939a-2ce795aea3ee] to C:\Users\Seif\.julia\compiled\v1.0\PyPlot\oatAj.ji.
Stacktrace:
 [1] error(::String) at .\error.jl:33
 [2] macro expansion at .\logging.jl:313 [inlined]
 [3] compilecache(::Base.PkgId, ::String) at .\loading.jl:1184
 [4] _require(::Base.PkgId) at .\logging.jl:311
 [5] require(::Base.PkgId) at .\loading.jl:852
 [6] macro expansion at .\logging.jl:311 [inlined]
 [7] require(::Module, ::Symbol) at .\loading.jl:834

Does this mean that PyPlot is not ready for 1.0-rc1 yet and needs fixes or some other thing on my side?


Julia v1.0 Install notes
#2

The former, PyPlot is not yet ready for 1.0. We’ll publish and maintain a list of packages that are 1.0-ready once 1.0 is out.


#3

Thank you Stefan, It is a nice idea to have a link listing 1.0 ready packages.


#4

I removed the tag “First Steps” since using the v1.0 release client is not something a beginner user should be doing. The release client announcement noted that v1.0-RC is the wild west for package developers to find out what actually works: not a good place to be unless you’re planning to PR to fix things. v0.7 is much safer since instead of erroring you’ll get some depwarns.


#5

Thanks, Chris, I hesitated a lot before choosing the tag and initially wrote Usage. Totally agree.


#6

No worries, I just wanted to make sure it’s clear for anyone who stumbles on this.


#7

So, why you released 1.0 ? I tought it would have come a bit (few months) after 0.7…
Sorry guys, but I personally think from a user point of view it has been a mistake.
I just installed it and come out with tons of small errors… Julia 1.0 is not ready for beginners, not of course for Julia itself, but for its pkg ecosystem…


#8

My issue has been solved by just running ] up after only two days of my original post. Can you give me an example of a language with similar activity or speed of improvement? Now, it’s only 8 days since the release of Julia 1.0 and almost all major packages have been updated. If you want to live with a cutting-edge version, bear the small pain that comes with it only a month or so, or a previous version will be fine for you. I don’t think releasing 1.0 was a mistake, if they didn’t, we would’ve been waiting forever. It’s just a few months and every thing will be perfect. That was the right thing to do in the long run.


#9

yes, but users read the news on reddit or even less techy sites in the hours/days after the annunce, try it all excited (2 guys in my lab did it), can’t do basic things and abbandon… even if in a couple of weeks everything works, it is already too late, it’s too late for people non involved in the project…
In the eyes of many users 1.0 shoudn’t be a cutting edge version, but a reasonable “stable” one (and it is, the problem is mostly in releasing the updated packages, I agree that it is a matter of few days)