[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[debbugs-tracker] bug#24275: closed (GuixSD has a /nonexistent directory

From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: [debbugs-tracker] bug#24275: closed (GuixSD has a /nonexistent directory)
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 13:49:01 +0000

Your message dated Sun, 28 Aug 2016 15:48:25 +0200
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#24275: Misnamed directory in GuixSD
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #24275,
regarding GuixSD has a /nonexistent directory
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact

24275: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=24275
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Misnamed directory in GuixSD Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 22:11:00 +0200 User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Installing GuixSD 0.11.0 creates a directory called /nonexistent
Despite its name, it does actually exist.

I suggest that we rename it or delete it.


Avoid eavesdropping.  Send strong encryted email.
PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3 
fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285  A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3
See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#24275: Misnamed directory in GuixSD Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 15:48:25 +0200 User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)

Vincent Legoll <address@hidden> skribis:

> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 1:32 AM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Vincent Legoll <address@hidden> skribis:
>>> I came with the attached patch, totally untested, probably wrong for some
>>> cases...
> My patch was heuristic, so bound to be wrong sometimes...
>> We currently lack a way to specify whether the home directory should be
>> created, which would be useful for ‘nobody’.
> This is the alternative solution, specifying it, always right.

Yeah, that’s what I thought.  It may be useful in other situations too.

>> So what about a patch along these lines instead?  It adds a
>> ‘create-home-directory?’ field to <user-account> and sets it to #f for
>> ‘nobody’.
> LGTM, but do I understand correctly: the default value being false, we
> will have to always specify the added param as true in system definitions ?
> Why not the other way around, that would not need any modifications of
> current configs.

Oops, I meant it to be #t by default, of course.  Good catch!

Pushed as commits eb56ee027b4c6b5682f69fa885d16e55c4495bd8 and



--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]