GNU bug report logs -
#59423
Invalid 'location' field generated in dovecot configuration
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Maxim,
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> writes:
> Hi Ludovic,
>
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>>
>>>>> The issue seems to be with the serialization of the
>>>>> <namespace-configuration> object nested in the <dovecot-configuration>
>>>>> record. I tried this at the REPL:
>>>>>
>>>>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,m (gnu services mail)
>>>>> scheme@(gnu services mail)> (namespace-configuration (name "inbox"))
>>>>> $8 = #<<namespace-configuration> name: "inbox" type: "private"
>>>>> separator: "" prefix: "" location: "" inbox?: #f hidden?: #f
>>>>> list?: #t subscriptions?: #t mailboxes: () %location: #f>
>>>>> scheme@(gnu services mail)> (serialize-configuration $8 namespace-configuration-fields)
>>>>> name=inbox
>>>>> type=private
>>>>> separator=
>>>>> prefix=
>>>>> location=#f
>>>>
>>>> The location here should probably be empty rather than `#f' no? It looks
>>>> as though the value is coming from the internal %location, rather than
>>>> the user-provided location.
>>
>> Uh.
>>
>>>> I'll if I can find anything the macro, it looks quite complex to me :-).
>>>
>>> It's not only to you, if that helps. It's rather... intimidating ^^'.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> Ludovic, would you have an idea of where the %location field or its
>>> CONFIGURATION-location accessor come into play?
>>
>> We have this:
>>
>> (define-record-type* #,(id #'stem #'< #'stem #'>)
>> stem
>> #,(id #'stem #'make- #'stem)
>> #,(id #'stem #'stem #'?)
>> #,@(map (lambda (name getter def)
>> #`(#,name #,getter (default #,def)
>> (sanitize
>> #,(id #'stem #'validate- #'stem #'- name))))
>> #'(field ...)
>> #'(field-getter ...)
>> #'(field-default ...))
>> (%location #,(id #'stem #'stem #'-location)
>> (default (and=> (current-source-location)
>> source-properties->location))
>> (innate)))
>>
>> That generates two accessors called ‘namespace-configuration-location’.
>> The second one shadows the first one.
>
> Yes. You didn't address my question directly though, so let me ask it
> again: where is this %location field access (named "location") used? It
> seems nowhere. Thus, we can simply rename it without impacting
> anything, right (except theoretical usages in the wild, since in the
> API).
>
>> With commit 44554e7133aa60e1b453436be1e80394189cabd9, the second one
>> is the “wrong” one: ‘namespace-configuration-location’ now returns the
>> ‘%location’ field, not the user-specified ‘location’ field. (I
>> reported that issue in <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/48284>.)
>>
>> What do you think of reverting 44554e7133aa60e1b453436be1e80394189cabd9?
>
> No. If we revert something, it won't be that whole commit, but just the
> moving of the field in the define-configuration produced record.
If we don't have an obvious solution to the issue and it may need more
time, how do you feel about reverting the changes? Unless there is a
work around that could be applied until a nicer more permanent solution
is found (although those temporary fixes do tend to stick around
sometimes :-) ).
Thanks,
Pierre
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 167 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.