From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60727) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fkCst-0002aT-7M for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:27:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fkCsp-0001UU-1j for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:27:07 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:58590) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fkCso-0001UN-P4 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:27:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fkCso-0003cH-Fz for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:27:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#30809] [PATCH 2/2] services: Add Gitolite. Resent-Message-ID: References: <20180723214328.18740-1-mail@cbaines.net> <20180723214328.18740-2-mail@cbaines.net> <87o9ext2b8.fsf@lassieur.org> <87zhy9kbyu.fsf@cbaines.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Lassieur In-reply-to: <87zhy9kbyu.fsf@cbaines.net> Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 20:26:14 +0200 Message-ID: <87tvog8trt.fsf@lassieur.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Christopher Baines Cc: 30809@debbugs.gnu.org Christopher Baines writes: [...] >>> +(define gitolite-setup >>> + (match-lambda >>> + (($ package user group home >>> + rc-file admin-pubkey) >>> + #~(let ((user-info (getpwnam #$user))) >>> + (use-modules (guix build utils)) -----------------(ice-9 match)----^ >>> + >>> + (simple-format #t "guix: gitolite: installing ~A\n" #$rc-file) >>> + (copy-file #$rc-file #$(string-append home "/.gitolite.rc")) >>> + >>> + (let ((admin-pubkey #$admin-pubkey) [...] >> I have a slight preference for the previous 'match' expression you used >> before, because it's used elsewhere this way and it requires less code. > > While I agree with both your points, I tried for quite a while last > weekend to get match to work, and couldn't. I couldn't even tell why it > suddenly wasn't. Unfortunately, Linux panicing when anything fails makes > debugging the system test a bit tricky. Maybe you forgot to add the (ice-9 match) module?