bug#19540: repeated ./././ in compiled modules

[Matt Wette]

Absolute paths work.  But this is really unsatisfactory IMO.  I develop code in modules and do so in many directories.  It would be quite painful to just use absolute paths.

I don't see what the big security thread is.   If really a problem, why does guile allow relative paths?

For comparison, Python will load modules in the current directory.

Nonetheless, I think "." is breaking the traceback with the "./" being added on reload.  When I was using "." I wasn't getting file, line information in tracebacks.  Now, without GUILE_LOAD_PATH set to ":$HOME/opt/guile" I get traceback info for modules in my current directory.

I think the following may be a candidate fix?

code is from guile-2.0.11, in file boot-9.scm, near line 1683:

(define (in-vicinity vicinity file)

  (let ((tail (let ((len (string-length vicinity)))

                (if (zero? len)

                    #f

                    (string-ref vicinity (- len 1))))))

    (string-append vicinity

                   (if (or (not tail) (file-name-separator? tail))

                       ""

                       file-name-separator-string)

                   file)))

;; FIX?

(define (new-in-vicinity vicinity file)

  (let ((tail (let ((len (string-length vicinity)))

                (if (or (zero? len) (string=? "." vicinity))

                    #f

                    (string-ref vicinity (- len 1))))))

    (string-append vicinity

                   (if (or (not tail) (file-name-separator? tail))

                       ""

                       file-name-separator-string)

                   file)))

On Jan 19, 2015, at 12:28 PM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:

Matt Wette <address@hidden> skribis:

1) I found that this problem persists across restarts of guile.  I have been debugging a module in current dir and I am seeing the path extend an extra "./" every time I type ",reload (lalr1).

2) My environment includes
  GUILE_LOAD_PATH=.:/Users/mwette/opt/guile

The problem stems from the ‘.’ entry in the search path.  On one hand
this is perfectly valid; on the other hand, it’s usually frowned upon,
because you may end up executing possibly malicious code that just
happens to be in $PWD.

All in all, I recommend using only absolute directory names in the
search paths, which will also solve the initial problem.

Can you confirm?

Thanks,
Ludo’.