From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: bug#21829: guix import hackage failures
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 22:19:57 +0100
Message-ID: <87h9kp1ts2.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <CAKrPhPNJDcOwyJp8Yifj1Ft-tJMtA-ATnXm64eaUn_9CYwCKGg@mail.gmail.com>
	<87d1vghjhk.fsf@gnu.org>
	<CAKrPhPNfBuoT3XAjL8z2sAYW+Wm-b28opCJHEW+y9oQXSzWaSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<87vb971t74.fsf@gnu.org>
	<CAKrPhPOeaub1iEnedfxv7G+1rgWpUS8mkjRGOxhtNdXSUz5a5Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<87lha3ufxv.fsf@gnu.org>
	<CAKrPhPN7oqedUgDKi41jQWEWiXAGb_7xMgnrv09YrQTn1CcJGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53276)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1ZxLmN-0004nM-9f
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2015 16:21:08 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1ZxLmJ-0004Vs-8R
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2015 16:21:07 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:47792)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1ZxLmJ-0004Vo-4v
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2015 16:21:03 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1ZxLmI-0007Gm-Nx
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2015 16:21:02 -0500
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.21829.B21829.144744962827892@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAKrPhPN7oqedUgDKi41jQWEWiXAGb_7xMgnrv09YrQTn1CcJGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	(Federico Beffa's message of "Fri, 13 Nov 2015 18:08:33 +0100")
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Federico Beffa <beffa@ieee.org>
Cc: 21829@debbugs.gnu.org

Federico Beffa <beffa@ieee.org> skribis:

> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> (define (canonical-newline-port port)
>   "Return an input port that wraps PORT such that all newlines consist
>   of a single carriage return."
>   (define (get-position)
>     (if (port-has-port-position? port) (port-position port) #f))
>   (define (set-position! position)
>     (if (port-has-set-port-position!? port)
>         (set-port-position! position port)
>         #f))
>   (define (close) (close-port port))
>   (define (read! bv start n)
>     (let loop ((count 0)
>                (byte (get-u8 port)))
>       (cond ((or (eof-object? byte) (=3D count n)) count)

BYTE is lost here in the case it is not EOF.

It may be best to move the (=3D count n) case right before the recursive
call below.

>             ((eqv? byte (char->integer #\return)) (loop count (get-u8 por=
t)))

In practice this discards LF even if it=E2=80=99s not following CR; that=E2=
=80=99s
probably a good enough approximation, but an XXX comment would be
welcome.

>             (else
>              (bytevector-u8-set! bv (+ start count) byte)
>              (loop (+ count 1) (get-u8 port))))))
>   (make-custom-binary-input-port "canonical-newline-port"
>                                  read!
>                                  get-position
>                                  set-position!
>                                  close))
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> IMO this is general enough that it could go into "guix/utils.scm". Are
> you OK with this?

Looks good!  Could you make a patch that does that, along with adding a
test or two in tests/utils.scm?

Thank you!

Ludo=E2=80=99.