From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 13 04:32:27 2021 Received: (at 25952) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Jul 2021 08:32:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39358 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m3Dpu-0001P1-2u for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 04:32:27 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f48.google.com ([209.85.221.48]:42653) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m3Dps-0001Oe-91 for 25952@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 04:32:12 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f48.google.com with SMTP id r11so24091167wro.9 for <25952@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 01:32:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0rohIGsj59c9vX8PYa3yP+WwWClGRVkMdyNZbgQF0/8=; b=RMKPalnLkqSIO4nucbNnEOsUOjfeSxdsyLP85oqdaORkAsTQ37hhwMPiPh2k1vPCp9 Hmg5qB1UQkb/Aww9DoA8+V65zXYwPECOILcdSheYefvIJMzG0Sb703y3DPjKjy7YFCCU Axjv41FDStKIkc9pk8rt752dvQho/HqdS8ShFjm0HAm+TPZk05Z3V7ucmGcx9HHS3wED A0KDrKUEWYysgrUHNgE7ag0oEdrGyJ8uOkAIFjxBZo17p8lrl60+DWerMNFdZFx8Fguw ADyNuZ12D5je3qLPA23sAnilUbWpiTizvmXKdcacFqTCYp789YmHuJ7lnDNvusWjottQ sQsg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0rohIGsj59c9vX8PYa3yP+WwWClGRVkMdyNZbgQF0/8=; b=jbPJhLHkC9vupayYanTfHk2sdtIJJzZGM4LeCmAKSw61BRVDDgjOPFdx5mjl5CiSRY atkY/ZCdJY4m3XwoarCG9g10v4KSbfdouvDfFBbYQigftptPihEZtJ71OVPEQyU1lxk2 5HQiku2tTb+TIeV1zUPquRyiguSuNdu1o3DSTMq8kE5H9pBAmn6+PicHQMtO1wKhco11 9kghk8wMunFhlwBVr0HlTE8tOF8QSOiy/q1qxzIyOLK9ym57UDJvd0ypSrNerY2Fvx/n F6euEGs/3Yj2P1GphdKTC1D2Z8Zirjz4UKatqK29vNsvBmiOYEtQe9rm+0dJ1dYTs0Sb BiWw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533jNdA5/Vc1eY1W5w8vfEU8/j1o6SMfzcaNzmtMQatyMhPS8AhL P0UmMfBurd+qOSNZX6KXUQg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJysbeVwBGkLUBNKX7qSFUB9i9mJJsrylnZ1+pbS1Y3SzRMYVDTW2qsOcMuR2wTQp2KBw/Fxrw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5043:: with SMTP id h3mr4124319wrt.333.1626165126477; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 01:32:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:65d2:2476:f637:db1e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b15sm20184303wrr.27.2021.07.13.01.32.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 13 Jul 2021 01:32:05 -0700 (PDT) From: zimoun To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Subject: Re: bug#25952: offloading empty machines file References: <20170303165648.wg5nypcizxr2n6t5@abyayala> <87tv03ycvo.fsf@nckx> Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 10:11:30 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87tv03ycvo.fsf@nckx> (Tobias Geerinckx-Rice's message of "Mon, 25 May 2020 22:32:11 +0200") Message-ID: <86bl76pr9p.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25952 Cc: 25952@debbugs.gnu.org, contact.ng0@cryptolab.net X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Tobias, On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 22:32, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote: > zimoun =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A >> This bug [1] had not been commented since the last 3 years and it has >> been asked more info 3 weeks ago. > > The issue is that files such as /etc/guix/machines.scm (but this applies > equally to /etc/guix/acl & so on) are expected to evaluate to a sexp. > > An empty file does not a valid sexp make, so Guix throws an prickly backt= race > @ your face & dies. This is unlike most other configuration formats wher= e an > empty file or one consisting entirely of comments is a no-op. > > We should decide whether =E2=80=98=E2=80=99 is a valid sexp (oh dear, phi= losophy) or throw > something softer at people. > >> Therefore, I am closing. Feel free to reopen if I misunderstand somethi= ng. > > I think this bug should remain open until it's decided. What you? This bug [1] had been initially opened on March, 3rd 2017 then commented for the first time [2] on May, 3rd 2020 and closed [3] on May, 25th 2020. Then reopen the same day [4] with this =E2=80=9Cphilosophical=E2=80= =9D question about: is empty =E2=80=99=E2=80=99 a valid sexp? On May, 26th 2020 [5], I = provided more examples. From my understanding, =C2=ABthrow something softer=C2=BB should be done on= the Guile side, as suggested by [6] on September, 13rd 2020. Personally, I do not see what could be the next action [7]? Therefore, if no more explanations about what the issue really is and what be the plan to fix it, I will close it. WDYT? All the best, simon 1: 2: 3: 4: 5: 6: 7: