Hi Maxim,

Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> writes:

[...]

>>>> Yeah I'm afraid I still see the same issue after a `git pull` just now:
>>>>
>>>> ~/code/guix [env]$ ./pre-inst-env guix system build -e '(@@ (gnu tests mail) %dovecot-os)'
>>>> /gnu/store/ayfvf5s561q955kv8wrkklrvq3ga3qpy-system
>>>> ~/code/guix [env]$ guix gc -R
>>>> /gnu/store/ayfvf5s561q955kv8wrkklrvq3ga3qpy-system | grep
>>>> dovecot\.conf | xargs grep "^location"
>>>> location=#<<location> file: "gnu/tests/mail.scm" line: 297 column: 20>
>>>>
>>>> Have you tried to rebuild from scratch, after a `make clean-go'? When
>>>> first bisecting this, I was working from the git repo and couldn't
>>>> reproduce the bug. Then it worked by using `guix time-machine' to bisect
>>>> rather than work from git.
>>>>
>>>> So I'm guessing the change being in a macro, there could be residue .go
>>>> files that need recompiling?
>>>
>>> Oh, I just realized the change was reverted with
>>> 44554e7133aa60e1b453436be1e80394189cabd9, then I'm probably the one who
>>> needs to do a `make clean-go' :-).
>
> The change was reinstated as part of the mcron update, in
> 44554e7133aa60e1b453436be1e80394189cabd9.  The bit that seems to cause
> the issue here (still not clearly understood) is probably this one:
>
> diff --git a/gnu/services/configuration.scm b/gnu/services/configuration.scm
> index 636c49ccba..dacfc52ba9 100644
> --- a/gnu/services/configuration.scm
> +++ b/gnu/services/configuration.scm
> @@ -242,17 +242,17 @@ (define-record-type* #,(id #'stem #'< #'stem #'>)
>                 stem
>                 #,(id #'stem #'make- #'stem)
>                 #,(id #'stem #'stem #'?)
> -               (%location #,(id #'stem #'stem #'-location)
> -                          (default (and=> (current-source-location)
> -                                          source-properties->location))
> -                          (innate))
>                 #,@(map (lambda (name getter def)
>                           #`(#,name #,getter (default #,def)
>                                     (sanitize
>                                      #,(id #'stem #'validate- #'stem #'- name))))
>                         #'(field ...)
>                         #'(field-getter ...)
> -                       #'(field-default ...)))
> +                       #'(field-default ...))
> +               (%location #,(id #'stem #'stem #'-location)
> +                          (default (and=> (current-source-location)
> +                                          source-properties->location))
> +                          (innate)))
>  
>               (define #,(id #'stem #'stem #'-fields)
>                 (list (configuration-field
>
>
> Reverting it would likely fix the issue (haven't tried), but it'd be
> nice to have a clear understanding of what's going on.  It may have
> unmasked a bug waiting to bite.
>
> The issue seems to be with the serialization of the
> <namespace-configuration> object nested in the <dovecot-configuration>
> record.  I tried this at the REPL:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> ,m (gnu services mail)
> scheme@(gnu services mail)> (namespace-configuration (name "inbox"))
> $8 = #<<namespace-configuration> name: "inbox" type: "private" separator: "" prefix: "" location: "" inbox?: #f hidden?: #f list?: #t subscriptions?: #t mailboxes: () %location: #f>
> scheme@(gnu services mail)> (serialize-configuration $8 namespace-configuration-fields)
> name=inbox
> type=private
> separator=
> prefix=
> location=#f

The location here should probably be empty rather than `#f' no? It looks
as though the value is coming from the internal %location, rather than
the user-provided location. If the two fields can shadow each other,
then indeed, that looks like an existing bug that was exposed by the
reordering, rather than a bug with the reorder itself.

I'll if I can find anything the macro, it looks quite complex to me :-).

> inbox=no
> hidden=no
> list=yes
> subscriptions=yes
> $9 = #<gexp  gnu/services/configuration.scm:123:2 7f78f494fde0>
>
> But as you can see, it doesn't reproduce in this environment.  I'll keep experimenting.

Thanks for looking into this!