Ansible & others' problems with wrapped '.ansible-real' scripts

Hi,

I had some problems getting current ansible package to work. It seems that

the bin/ansible script which is created as part of the python-build-system

via a call to `wrap-program' interferes with certain expectations ansible

has regarding how it and its subcommands are called.

This mechanism does not work well with our generated created .ansible-real.

See [1] for a similar issue that has since been worked around in the newest

version of ansible.

For now, I have a similar workaround that add some guix-specific checks to

ansible looking for being called as .ansible-real, though I do consider

this a hack. This problem is indicative of a bigger issue: the fact that

wrap-program currently leads to subtle bugs for lots of scripts. There has

been some noise on #guix about solving this problem in general.

Thanks,

Jelle

[1]: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/22261

Jelle Licht <jlicht@fsfe.org> skribis:

For the record, the discussion is visible here:

https://gnunet.org/bot/log/guix/2017-05-02#T1370586.

I think it’s bad for a program to rely on argv[0], but I also think

those .thing-real are kinda ugly. :-)

Ludo’.

severity 26752 important

The current ansible package is still brokenin the same way.

Is there already an acceptable way of working around this problem?

Otherwise I could send my (extremely hacky) workaround that adds a specific

condition in the ansible source code to check for .ansible-real.

Thanks,

Jelle

2017-05-03 12:04 GMT+02:00 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>:

Hi,

Jelle Licht <jlicht@fsfe.org> skribis:

For now I think we have to go with the hack. Make sure to add a comment

linking to this bug report.

Thanks,

Ludo’.

merge 26752 31299

Merging with https://bugs.gnu.org/26752, which you submitted a while

back.

Ludo’.

Just a heads-up, if we make the Python wrap-program do the wrapping inline (bug# 29856), this problem here will also vanish.

See https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2017-11/msg00027.htmlfor the newest possible approach.

ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

There is a way to get around this. It’s presented in #29951:

https://issues.guix.info/issue/29951

Open issues with this include a hard-coded store prefix, but it’s no big

obstacle. Should we give this a try on core-updates?

block 29951 by 26752

block 26752 by 29951

FWIW, I fixed our ansible package in

https://issues.guix.info/issue/33777. This is not a general solution,

but at least our ansible package works at the moment.

Hi,

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:

Definitely, please do!

Thanks,

Ludo’.

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:

BTW, there’s also this patch series on this topic:

https://issues.guix.info/issue/27003

What to do?

Ludo’.

Hello,

Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> writes:

If this bug is about ansible malfunctioning then it should be closed,

Arun fixed it in 01cb4d47570c38812492bbc331b7b818e1b69fbb. I've tested

it myself successfully with the command from the IRC report[0] (linked

in the merged issue[2]).

On the other hand If it's about fixing it with the new wrap-script from

Ricardo I can send a patch, but the derivation will need guile as a new

input.

[0]: http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2018-04-28.log#013741

[1]: https://issues.guix.info/issue/31299

Brice.

Hi

Brice Waegeneire <brice@waegenei.re> writes:

I would be okay with closing it, as ansible works fine right now. If the

current solution is deemed too brittle, or if the intent behind the new

wrap-script is that we use it everywhere we can, then not of course.

- Jelle

# Author agreed, nobody objected in 7 days

close 26752

quit