From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id gN3cC7GVxV7FDwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 20 May 2020 20:40:17 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id MCuJB7GVxV7xMwAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 20 May 2020 20:40:17 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB90394042B for ; Wed, 20 May 2020 20:40:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:45618 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jbVVf-0004ay-Lq for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 20 May 2020 16:40:15 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44122) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jbVVS-0004Zm-Rb for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2020 16:40:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:42885) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jbVVS-0006bh-Id for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2020 16:40:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jbVVS-0004GZ-E1 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2020 16:40:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#41180] [PATCH] Add cachefilesd service. Resent-From: Jean-Baptiste Note Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 20:40:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 41180 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 41180@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 41180-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B41180.159000719816383 (code B ref 41180); Wed, 20 May 2020 20:40:02 +0000 Received: (at 41180) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 May 2020 20:39:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54431 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jbVVO-0004GB-Bz for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2020 16:39:58 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com ([209.85.221.66]:37635) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jbVVN-0004Fy-5Y for 41180@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2020 16:39:57 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id l17so4520694wrr.4 for <41180@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 20 May 2020 13:39:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=EHBTsPzfhleAIO8tcL9yUy9aSTLJacaGAp8/30xLMDA=; b=kkCkxybznXmv40Jwm+a/Q6OuKFGlfac5jnNR0NJ8cnFuo/s30T2/9ALQEZmSdUWaQT BRDsTSxRlIs41rnIxoT4zj8OM9f7S2COcuKMK9tnKYycPWjpA3t0fQJeYuYzuchchHab 9Sg3ogwubFeI5HeNZXlnkH1lBV4noN0Omv6kl1l9iok+HUGTjnovjSC8zTFcUz4rcMIT iO98j4dBOG0azLnWuv0uDC/8Wra3sZalyyzIgrdF/nNGguWIN1YXBcXZC/LdN0to/V+s FABfakpQpxPu/esYHGIKDHo7lerAbrdCuJzaty0LzA22UZ5yNXi23JrIt80wrWCapW5N U9yg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=EHBTsPzfhleAIO8tcL9yUy9aSTLJacaGAp8/30xLMDA=; b=atLeZbrJPxlPx4IK4iNJWKLiHjItsB9oYrxKderCNyu6IJel+UQVPgAt3HybxZYQk5 9+OywYjO68oph6tjQSjB/TeSIatvEm186nchMsc4+5nkAQrjV7sQkgiztY+DNkWgefCp RfwCMXrZX21vXdss320ntNiAGTbGveZtFV7RIIwmvgogclhUZnBiP98V70neGLo8EZDd L2rCvHCqN/hHQHsc/V3K1qzC3bd3l5K8rhQbrQEtCpUcDFWndRHchlbbj7eJyIDby+ZJ GrjPlLK5PwIzNAL2pV4JuPP8xESazmxaLmVaXUxs6ahj1A0UWL1OQ2uLB8YaWxRyX5Cb o4kQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533hg2hWcZbIJQBFTt18h4BKwUfHnMpkCmgw4V6D3funXJrNr+7M a10Vkf3YqMNNfUbPZCmly3QMqBU0uE0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzDCVioeEg/6kO6dvHWdxg2x4YRCtM6wzSNZ1v7sUrgq6x/0MmWawTvMROK9X9GdVkuM/XRiQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:c414:: with SMTP id v20mr5360673wrf.379.1590007190576; Wed, 20 May 2020 13:39:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from guixrules ([2a01:e35:2e0b:a6b0:e2ce:c3ff:fe74:cec8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b7sm4056876wmj.29.2020.05.20.13.39.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 20 May 2020 13:39:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Jean-Baptiste Note References: <87v9l3zjg7.fsf@m4x.org> <87k118unsc.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 20:39:36 +0000 In-Reply-To: <87k118unsc.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Tue, 19 May 2020 14:12:03 +0200") Message-ID: <87367ucpdj.fsf@m4x.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (rsa verify failed) header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=kkCkxybz; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.11 X-TUID: ID5gZY+sAHBt --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Hi Mathieu, Thanks a lot for taking so much time to help me out and review this patch. Following your previous mail, I'm currently writing a test. I may follow NFS's tests rather than CUPS -- (some of) NFS' tests just checks from within the marionette that the service has been started, while CUPS verifies from the outside that an external service is correctly running. While I do prefer the CUPS test -- verify at the "user level" that the service is provided -- it seems very complex to me to test cachefilesd at a high level with a binary decision and no false positive. Venues for this could be: - maybe an NFS mount with the fsc option when cachefilesd is not activated will fail -- I need to check that; - or maybe mounting some NFS share with fsc, accessing it, and checking afterwards that the cache has been filled by cached data -- this is getting complex though, and probably not a clear-cut scenario. I don't know how high you will set the bar and if a simple 'check that the daemon is running' would be sufficient to you :) Thanks a lot for the various documentation pointers and style recommendation. I really appreciate all of this! I will provide a comprehensive patch with your changes integrated, and a test, as soon as i am happy with it -- or just give up writing the perfect test. Kind regards, Jean-Baptiste --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEPxcq3dp4FVY5UpckkC0pVsuz75YFAl7FlYgACgkQkC0pVsuz 75YGZxAAhizoSDCp66Nzs6FFGlKHE21PfqOB1nNF88ak/8kYd/mo+TLMN4CILaeh XlivhmK28z6XN8lyX2ou5P5VPgd7vK16uKUbu/l7rNsZPA8IuO6MnejSAeoPO3K6 2dYQyjgJKDYbwV9cRQUu8kcUrzOcjbvQmpX6mwZIIcdU4l/RystsH8ddDa/IrAfO +YQ9VxiR7U8NCrMFJSnO2N/wl/h2OOygFg1LBO9HEGrbehJBFQnXSjTLsJNJRqV6 Iq6FEIghm3OqGIgFfBbVJ6wGptTPaZOBleUGjcmoI52KZMu5y8AxkqXEjr2ly3ym J8qKdyW0hGxptBIYxICD78mjAe/JK/zwqqT4Z1DZnvbLQDTpcJn0+hHgGZBBFoK3 uIiI4FUjkFa+ML+8woFWCHA36DN62peU4XHilBYCgZWqGmh2RSMtSANjINp8uw6r 2XSUEMT1Wg8SRj3oynO8uGU/q/OBEqioelLRxEPO67YUgNoELcTbUwO0dmMqbUUf 7zP2Kz1sehT9762+9E7OpBTvPnk14xZNQK1IQb171AUmoIpaGMmUdT7VEq0CpyrV WVWfSVopCWNbMIuAxfC/jQkCHDigBNeSOPZZ9LSzhg/qE7bj89VD/NsBbiY98Pdo HI5/rM7yl0mLW+WIm3yD1SyL1cIusZ7lEO+MKKjAi2DIw379DMw= =bVBr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--