GNU bug report logs - #45615
Wrong type argument in "guix lint -c archival"

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 45615 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 45615 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com>
To: bug-guix <bug-guix <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Wrong type argument in "guix lint -c archival"
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2021 23:14:01 +0100

When running "guix lint -c archival ugrep" I get this backtrace show below.

Expected behavior: No crash, but a useful error message.

Reproduce:

* Guix 947aed127a48ef41bab3bdbb4252eb2a56dafc10 (2021-01-01 13:55:11)
* ugrep (new package) see http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=45614


$ ./pre-inst-env guix lint ugrep -c archival
…
Backtrace:grep <at> 3.1.1 [archival]...
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
  1736:10 15 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ # _)
In unknown file:
          14 (apply-smob/0 #<thunk 7f1688172740>)
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
    718:2 13 (call-with-prompt _ _ #<procedure default-prompt-handle?>)
In ice-9/eval.scm:
    619:8 12 (_ #(#(#<directory (guile-user) 7f1687daff00>)))
In guix/ui.scm:
  2127:12 11 (run-guix-command _ . _)
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
  1736:10 10 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ # _)
  1731:15  9 (with-exception-handler #<procedure 7f1685072a20 at ic?> ?)
In srfi/srfi-1.scm:
    634:9  8 (for-each #<procedure 7f1685dc8880 at guix/scripts/lin?> ?)
In guix/scripts/lint.scm:
     65:4  7 (run-checkers #<package ugrep <at> 3.1.1 /home/hartmut/deve?> ?)
In srfi/srfi-1.scm:
    634:9  6 (for-each #<procedure 7f16756f69f0 at guix/scripts/lin?> ?)
In guix/scripts/lint.scm:
    74:21  5 (_ _)
In guix/lint.scm:
   1225:4  4 (check-archival _)
   1092:2  3 (call-with-networking-fail-safe _ _ _)
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
  1736:10  2 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ # _)
  1669:16  1 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _)
  1667:16  0 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _)

ice-9/boot-9.scm:1667:16: In procedure raise-exception:
In procedure string-prefix?: Wrong type argument in position 2
(expecting string): #<unspecified>

-- 
Regards
Hartmut Goebel

| Hartmut Goebel          | h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com               |
| www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |

Message #8 received at 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com>,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#45615: SWH API break?
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 16:41:46 +0100

Hi,

Thanks for the report.

It comes from 'visit-snapshot-url' returning #<unspecified> instead of
#f.  Then 'swh-url' fails because the 'path' argument is not a string.

Well, I do not how to fix it.  I am confused by:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
;; <https://archive.softwareheritage.org/api/1/origin/52181937/visits/>
(define-json-mapping <visit> make-visit visit?
  json->visit
  (date visit-date "date" string->date*)
  (origin visit-origin)
  (url visit-url "origin_visit_url")
  (snapshot-url visit-snapshot-url "snapshot_url" string*) ;string | #f
  (status visit-status "status" string->symbol)   ;'full | 'partial | 'ongoing
  (number visit-number "visit"))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

and why it is not string or #f.

Ludo, any tips? :-)


All the best,
simon

Message #11 received at 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com>
Subject: Re: bug#45615: SWH API break?
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:12:14 +0100

Hi!

zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> skribis:

> It comes from 'visit-snapshot-url' returning #<unspecified> instead of
> #f.  Then 'swh-url' fails because the 'path' argument is not a string.
>
> Well, I do not how to fix it.  I am confused by:
>
> ;; <https://archive.softwareheritage.org/api/1/origin/52181937/visits/>
> (define-json-mapping <visit> make-visit visit?
>   json->visit
>   (date visit-date "date" string->date*)
>   (origin visit-origin)
>   (url visit-url "origin_visit_url")
>   (snapshot-url visit-snapshot-url "snapshot_url" string*) ;string | #f
>   (status visit-status "status" string->symbol)   ;'full | 'partial | 'ongoing
>   (number visit-number "visit"))
>
> and why it is not string or #f.

As discussed on IRC the other day, the culprit seems to be the recent
guile-json upgrade (from 4.3.2 to 4.4.1, commit
f9e1baa8933ea2ed385d0272dbfbe4e22f192bde).

Were you able to check the raw JSON and see where the value is getting
lost?

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Message #14 received at 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com>
Subject: Re: bug#45615: SWH API break?
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:45:55 +0100

Hi Ludo,

On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 at 14:12, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:

>>   (snapshot-url visit-snapshot-url "snapshot_url" string*) ;string | #f

[...]

>> and why it is not string or #f.
>
> As discussed on IRC the other day, the culprit seems to be the recent
> guile-json upgrade (from 4.3.2 to 4.4.1, commit
> f9e1baa8933ea2ed385d0272dbfbe4e22f192bde).
>
> Were you able to check the raw JSON and see where the value is getting
> lost?

Well, maybe I miss something.  The JSON looks like:

https://archive.softwareheritage.org/api/1/origin/https://github.com/Genivia/ugrep/get/

as we already discussed [1] the other day.  From my understanding, when
the field does not exist, before guile-json sets to #f and now it sets
to #<unspecified>; I guess that it is related to the NEWS entry:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
  - Record-JSON mapping now allows using *unspecified* values to indicate a
    field record should not be serialized.
    (Fixes #61)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

and the behaviour change is described here:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
Unspecified fields will now have the value *unspecified*. You mention
that json->link-record would assign a #f but that's not actually
correct, since a field could be a boolean in which case there would not
be a way to identify it. 
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

<https://github.com/aconchillo/guile-json/issues/61#issuecomment-703212590>


I am not familiar enough with Guile-JSON to see how to fix.  Any tips?

Cheers,
simon

1: <http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2021-01-07.log#180852>

Message #17 received at 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com>
Subject: Re: bug#45615: SWH API break?
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 16:16:41 +0100

Hi,

zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> skribis:

> Well, maybe I miss something.  The JSON looks like:
>
> https://archive.softwareheritage.org/api/1/origin/https://github.com/Genivia/ugrep/get/
>
> as we already discussed [1] the other day.  From my understanding, when
> the field does not exist, before guile-json sets to #f and now it sets
> to #<unspecified>; I guess that it is related to the NEWS entry:
>
>   - Record-JSON mapping now allows using *unspecified* values to indicate a
>     field record should not be serialized.
>     (Fixes #61)
>
>
> and the behaviour change is described here:
>
> Unspecified fields will now have the value *unspecified*. You mention
> that json->link-record would assign a #f but that's not actually
> correct, since a field could be a boolean in which case there would not
> be a way to identify it. 
>
> <https://github.com/aconchillo/guile-json/issues/61#issuecomment-703212590>
>
>
> I am not familiar enough with Guile-JSON to see how to fix.  Any tips?

Thanks for investigating!  Looking more closely, I think the issue is
related to this change, but to me it’s a bug: it’s now impossible to set
a field to #f.  Reported at
<https://github.com/aconchillo/guile-json/issues/69>.

Unfortunately, I can’t think of a way to work around it since it’s
pretty fundamental.

At any rate, we should add a test that exercises this in ‘tests/swh.scm’
so we don’t get caught by surprise next time.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Message #20 received at 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com>
Subject: Re: bug#45615: SWH API break?
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 12:09:35 +0100

Hi!

For the record, I reported the issue here:

  https://github.com/aconchillo/guile-json/issues/69

It was promptly fixed and released in 4.5.1, but at first sight this
version introduces other issues.  To be continued…

Ludo’.

Message #23 received at 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Aleix via web <issues.guix.gnu.org <at> elephly.net>
To: 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Wrong type argument in "guix lint -c archival"
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 17:59:43 +0100

Hi Ludo,

Can you share what other issues might arose after the fix?

I'd be happy to look into it.

Thanks!

Aleix

Message #28 received at 45615-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 45615-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com>
Subject: Re: bug#45615: Wrong type argument in "guix lint -c archival"
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 11:25:08 +0100

Hi!

Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> skribis:

> For the record, I reported the issue here:
>
>   https://github.com/aconchillo/guile-json/issues/69
>
> It was promptly fixed and released in 4.5.1, but at first sight this
> version introduces other issues.  To be continued…

Updated Guile-JSON in commit 5f7f4e16d64135291fc5b3d12e57476a52a97105,
followed by a test specifically for this issue in
5225732b9b54ffa92b9d199246b87dae666a3f77.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Message #31 received at 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Aleix via web <issues.guix.gnu.org <at> elephly.net>
Cc: 45615 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#45615: Wrong type argument in "guix lint -c archival"
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 11:27:57 +0100

Hi Alex!

Thanks for reaching out to us.  :-)

Aleix via web <issues.guix.gnu.org <at> elephly.net> skribis:

> Can you share what other issues might arose after the fix?
>
> I'd be happy to look into it.

There were problems in JSON bindings we had that were not prepared to
handle unspecified values, but that was easily fixed:

  https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=3d43b7aef3d5b7ad2ba0418d2afd657e5fedeaf5

I’m glad we have good test coverage here, otherwise adjusting to these
changes can be very error-prone!

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.