[bug#33836] [PATCH 1/2] services: configuration: Add location.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Oleg,

A friendly ping!  :-)

Ludo’.

Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> skribis:

> Hello,
>
> Oleg Pykhalov <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> * gnu/services/configuration.scm (define-configuration): Add location.
>> * gnu/services/mail.scm (namespace-configuration)[location]: Rename to
>> 'mailbox-location'.
>> (uglify-field-name): Handle this.
>> * doc/guix.texi (Mail Services): Document this.
>
> Nice!
>
>> --- a/gnu/services/configuration.scm
>> +++ b/gnu/services/configuration.scm
>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>>    #:use-module (guix packages)
>>    #:use-module (guix records)
>>    #:use-module (guix gexp)
>> +  #:use-module ((guix utils) #:select (source-properties->location))
>>    #:autoload   (texinfo) (texi-fragment->stexi)
>>    #:autoload   (texinfo serialize) (stexi->texi)
>>    #:use-module (ice-9 match)
>> @@ -129,6 +130,10 @@
>>                   #,(id #'stem #'% #'stem)
>>                   #,(id #'stem #'make- #'stem)
>>                   #,(id #'stem #'stem #'?)
>> +                 (location configuration-location
>> +                           (default (and=> (current-source-location)
>> +                                           source-properties->location))
>> +                           (innate))
>
> What about calling the field ‘%location’ instead?  That would avoid the
> collision with the other ‘location’ field and it should be fine because
> it’s not a field we manually set anyway.
>
> Also, instead of ‘configuration-location’, shouldn’t it be
>
>   (id #'stem #'-location)
>
> ?  That will avoid ending up with one ‘configuration-location’ binding
> for each record type.
>
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.