GNU bug report logs -
#45836
cups-service-type duplicates lp group
Previous Next
Full log
Message #31 received at 45836-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Am Montag, den 18.01.2021, 15:47 +0100 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
> Hi,
>
> Leo Prikler <leo.prikler <at> student.tugraz.at> skribis:
>
> > > > diff --git a/gnu/system/shadow.scm b/gnu/system/shadow.scm
> > > > index 0538fb1a24..7c57222716 100644
> > > > --- a/gnu/system/shadow.scm
> > > > +++ b/gnu/system/shadow.scm
> > > > @@ -321,13 +321,13 @@ of user '~a' is undeclared")
> > > > <user-group> objects. Raise an error if a user account refers
> > > > to
> > > > a undefined
> > > > group."
> > > > (define accounts
> > > > - (filter user-account? accounts+groups))
> > > > + (delete-duplicates (filter user-account? accounts+groups)
> > > > eq?))
> > > >
> > > > (define user-specs
> > > > (map user-account->gexp accounts))
> > > >
> > > > (define groups
> > > > - (filter user-group? accounts+groups))
> > > > + (delete-duplicates (filter user-group? accounts+groups)
> > > > eq?))
> > >
> > > Why use ‘eq?’? I’d use ‘equal?’, but note that <user-account>
> > > records
> > > cannot necessarily be compared with ‘equal?’ because of the
> > > thunked
> > > ‘home-directory’ field (‘equal?’ is meaningless for procedures).
> > My personal reasoning (and perhaps a rather strong opinion) is,
> > that it
> > is an error to add duplicate users even if they happen to be
> > equal?.
> > eq? is only provided as a way out for the specific case of
> > services,
> > that need to do so for safety reasons – e.g. cups to not allow
> > overriding of the lp group if it has been removed from the OS
> > groups
> > for whichever reason.
>
> Ah I see, makes sense to me!
I've now pushed it with eq?, if there's a (good!) reason to change that
to equal?, it can still be done later.
Regards,
Leo
This bug report was last modified 4 years and 176 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.