X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: [bug#50874] [PATCH] lint: Check if HTTPS version of HTTP URL exists.
Resent-From: Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: guix-patches@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 19:10:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.50874.B.163285615921794 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: report 50874
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch
To: 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Debbugs-Original-To: guix-patches@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B.163285615921794
(code B ref -1); Tue, 28 Sep 2021 19:10:02 +0000
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Sep 2021 19:09:19 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47008 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1mVITf-0005fR-7b
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 15:09:19 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:50524)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <public@HIDDEN>) id 1mVITc-0005fH-Vg
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 15:09:17 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40626)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <public@HIDDEN>)
id 1mVITc-0000Id-I7
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 15:09:16 -0400
Received: from h87-96-130-155.cust.a3fiber.se ([87.96.130.155]:55210
helo=mail.yoctocell.xyz)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <public@HIDDEN>)
id 1mVITa-0007XC-Oy
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 15:09:16 -0400
From: Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=yoctocell.xyz;
s=mail; t=1632856151;
bh=87pvJRcTIZ6md0/oxoEicnuYl6vLgh09JJMH/G4RTfQ=;
h=From:To:Subject:Date;
b=G2voEGkMeXyNE9v8fZHtdmXgJ4jTx/26okBOrnIr5y7UWfefhdlNmMtosZxs657ZD
YdMkbmixMfI9mhE9SMoHhuoZsbc05G0Vs6ydm31+vNO8Bzlx5yfII6DPr71eQcUFTB
k5spVMMXa3kPSRfs3vaeT9TBlJMLnLTUSqUxQI9A=
Message-Id: <e2047d5738d30969bc766ef85ea65715954a6927.1632855961.git.public@HIDDEN>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 21:09:10 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=87.96.130.155; envelope-from=public@HIDDEN;
helo=mail.yoctocell.xyz
X-Spam_score_int: 39
X-Spam_score: 3.9
X-Spam_bar: +++
X-Spam_report: (3.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD=0.499,
FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD_FP=0.229, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=1.999,
PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP=0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001, TO_NO_BRKTS_DYNIP=2.299 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: * guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?): New procedure.
(check-home-page, check-source): Use it. --- I =?UTF-8?Q?don=E2=80=99t?= really know how to
test this while making it future-proof, any suggestions? guix/lint.scm |
41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+),
5 deletions(-)
Content analysis details: (1.7 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: yoctocell.xyz (xyz)]
1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail)
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
-2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
medium trust
[209.51.188.17 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2)
[209.51.188.17 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD_FP From abused NTLD
0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD From abused NTLD
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/)
* guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?): New procedure.
(check-home-page, check-source): Use it.
---
I don=E2=80=99t really know how to test this while making it future-proof, =
any
suggestions?
guix/lint.scm | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/guix/lint.scm b/guix/lint.scm
index 527fda165a..246a5ab9c8 100644
--- a/guix/lint.scm
+++ b/guix/lint.scm
@@ -875,17 +875,44 @@ (define (validate-uri uri package field)
(else
(error "internal linter error" status)))))
=20
+(define (check-if-https-uri-exists? uri field package)
+ "Given a URI that uses HTTP, check whether a HTTPS version exists."
+ (guard (c ((http-get-error? c)
+ #f))
+ (catch #t
+ (lambda ()
+ (let* ((url (uri->string uri))
+ (https-url (string-append
+ "https" (string-drop url (string-length "http")=
)))
+ (https-uri (string->uri https-url)))
+ (when (http-fetch/cached https-uri)
+ (make-warning package
+ (G_ "HTTPS version is available for: ~a")
+ (list url)
+ #:field field))))
+ (match-lambda*
+ ((or ('gnutls-error _ ...) ('tls-certificate-error _ ...))
+ #f)
+ (args
+ (apply throw args))))))
+
(define (check-home-page package)
"Emit a warning if PACKAGE has an invalid 'home-page' field, or if that
'home-page' is not reachable."
- (let ((uri (and=3D> (package-home-page package) string->uri)))
+ (let* ((home-page (package-home-page package))
+ (uri (and=3D> home-page string->uri)))
(cond
((uri? uri)
(match (validate-uri uri package 'home-page)
((and (? lint-warning? warning) warning)
(list warning))
- (_ '())))
- ((not (package-home-page package))
+ (_ (if (eq? (uri-scheme uri) 'http)
+ (match (check-if-https-uri-exists? uri 'home-page package)
+ ((? lint-warning? warning)
+ (list warning))
+ (_ '()))
+ '()))))
+ ((not home-page)
(if (or (string-contains (package-name package) "bootstrap")
(string=3D? (package-name package) "ld-wrapper"))
'()
@@ -1079,8 +1106,12 @@ (define (warnings-for-uris uris)
((uri rest ...)
(match (validate-uri uri package 'source)
(#t
- ;; We found a working URL, so stop right away.
- '())
+ (if (eq? (uri-scheme uri) 'http)
+ (match (check-if-https-uri-exists? uri 'source package)
+ ((? lint-warning? warning)
+ (list warning))
+ (_ '()))
+ '()))
(#f
;; Unsupported URL or other error, skip.
(loop rest warnings))
base-commit: 009f0fc3dde0c2162c6df02fc4790a9f1d909e99
--=20
2.33.0
Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.505 (Entity 5.505) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN From: help-debbugs@HIDDEN (GNU bug Tracking System) To: Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN> Subject: bug#50874: Acknowledgement ([PATCH] lint: Check if HTTPS version of HTTP URL exists.) Message-ID: <handler.50874.B.163285615921794.ack <at> debbugs.gnu.org> References: <e2047d5738d30969bc766ef85ea65715954a6927.1632855961.git.public@HIDDEN> X-Gnu-PR-Message: ack 50874 X-Gnu-PR-Package: guix-patches X-Gnu-PR-Keywords: patch Reply-To: 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 19:10:02 +0000 Thank you for filing a new bug report with debbugs.gnu.org. This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message has been received. Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other interested parties for their attention; they will reply in due course. Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s): guix-patches@HIDDEN If you wish to submit further information on this problem, please send it to 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org. Please do not send mail to help-debbugs@HIDDEN unless you wish to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system. --=20 50874: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D50874 GNU Bug Tracking System Contact help-debbugs@HIDDEN with problems
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: [bug#50874] [PATCH] lint: Check if HTTPS version of HTTP URL exists.
Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: guix-patches@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2021 15:16:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.50874.B50874.163318773822997 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50874
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch
To: Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
Cc: 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 50874-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B50874.163318773822997
(code B ref 50874); Sat, 02 Oct 2021 15:16:01 +0000
Received: (at 50874) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Oct 2021 15:15:38 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60281 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1mWgji-0005yr-3g
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 11:15:38 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49566)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1mWgjZ-0005yT-0L
for 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 11:15:37 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:55020)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>)
id 1mWgjT-0008Qr-Ah; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 11:15:23 -0400
Received: from [2a01:e0a:1d:7270:af76:b9b:ca24:c465] (port=36498 helo=ribbon)
by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa
(TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>)
id 1mWgjQ-0000qn-Ke; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 11:15:21 -0400
From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
References: <e2047d5738d30969bc766ef85ea65715954a6927.1632855961.git.public@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2021 17:15:18 +0200
In-Reply-To: <e2047d5738d30969bc766ef85ea65715954a6927.1632855961.git.public@HIDDEN>
(Xinglu Chen's message of "Tue, 28 Sep 2021 21:09:10 +0200")
Message-ID: <877devwj95.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: Hi,
Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN> skribis: > * guix/lint.scm
(check-if-https-uri-exists?): New procedure. > (check-home-page, check-source):
Use it. Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: yoctocell.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 T_SPF_TEMPERROR SPF: test of record failed (temperror)
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-)
Hi,
Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN> skribis:
> * guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?): New procedure.
> (check-home-page, check-source): Use it.
Applied, thanks!
> I don=E2=80=99t really know how to test this while making it future-proof=
, any
> suggestions?
I don=E2=80=99t know either, since we don=E2=80=99t have an easy way to spi=
n up an HTTPS
server. I think it=E2=80=99s okay to leave it as is, for lack of a better =
idea.
However, this version of the patch leads to test failures in
tests/lint.scm (=E2=80=9CConnection refused=E2=80=9D).
Ludo=E2=80=99.
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: [bug#50874] [PATCH] lint: Check if HTTPS version of HTTP URL exists.
Resent-From: Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: guix-patches@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2021 09:58:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.50874.B50874.163377344914511 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50874
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch
To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Cc: 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 50874-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B50874.163377344914511
(code B ref 50874); Sat, 09 Oct 2021 09:58:01 +0000
Received: (at 50874) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Oct 2021 09:57:29 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52312 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1mZ96e-0003lz-H6
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:57:29 -0400
Received: from h87-96-130-155.cust.a3fiber.se ([87.96.130.155]:34214
helo=mail.yoctocell.xyz) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <public@HIDDEN>) id 1mZ96R-0003lY-Qd
for 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:57:27 -0400
From: Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=yoctocell.xyz;
s=mail; t=1633773429;
bh=/38QMXp6EbbRoxcaTSz0p0Flu71Vi1aiv6+VtFbEiF8=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date;
b=bis2hcHgeyCHHKZQltormRy5EwYBzi7Rfrt6CPvrLl77yOhuIo9v2xFcTZUmOayJP
BGBH8QjIqdQdsQLwsxcBVoZkEyN/6fRlcsYhe4HUXTfEoVhZhEUM1lIvGrJK3ns5+F
bH05wOPAubaJ8IYVkFV1OHeYMaQEmvoiUWxRTTgA=
In-Reply-To: <877devwj95.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <e2047d5738d30969bc766ef85ea65715954a6927.1632855961.git.public@HIDDEN>
<877devwj95.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2021 11:57:08 +0200
Message-ID: <87v926ldvv.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Sat, Oct 02 2021, Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= wrote: > Hi, > > Xinglu
Chen <public@HIDDEN> skribis: > >> * guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?):
New procedure. >> (check-home-page, check-source): Use it. > > Applied, thanks!
Content analysis details: (3.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: yoctocell.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
0.0 T_SPF_TEMPERROR SPF: test of record failed (temperror)
0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD From abused NTLD
0.4 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to internal network by host with
dynamic-looking rDNS
0.0 PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP RDNS_DYNAMIC with FP steps
0.4 KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS Relay HELO differs from its IP's reverse DNS
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 2.9 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Sat, Oct 02 2021, Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= wrote: > Hi, > > Xinglu
Chen <public@HIDDEN> skribis: > >> * guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?):
New procedure. >> (check-home-page, check-source): Use it. > > Applied, thanks!
Content analysis details: (2.9 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: yoctocell.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD From abused NTLD
0.4 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to internal network by host with
dynamic-looking rDNS
1.0 BULK_RE_SUSP_NTLD Precedence bulk and RE: from a suspicious TLD
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
0.0 PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP RDNS_DYNAMIC with FP steps
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Oct 02 2021, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN> skribis:
>
>> * guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?): New procedure.
>> (check-home-page, check-source): Use it.
>
> Applied, thanks!
Was it? I don=E2=80=99t see it in the log.
>> I don=E2=80=99t really know how to test this while making it future-proo=
f, any
>> suggestions?
>
> I don=E2=80=99t know either, since we don=E2=80=99t have an easy way to s=
pin up an HTTPS
> server. I think it=E2=80=99s okay to leave it as is, for lack of a bette=
r idea.
>
> However, this version of the patch leads to test failures in
> tests/lint.scm (=E2=80=9CConnection refused=E2=80=9D).
Thanks for catching this; I will look into it. Good that you didn=E2=80=99t
apply it then. :-)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=R/nz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: [bug#50874] [PATCH] lint: Check if HTTPS version of HTTP URL exists.
Resent-From: Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: guix-patches@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2021 10:12:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.50874.B50874.163377429515823 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50874
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch
To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Cc: 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 50874-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B50874.163377429515823
(code B ref 50874); Sat, 09 Oct 2021 10:12:01 +0000
Received: (at 50874) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Oct 2021 10:11:35 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52321 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1mZ9KJ-000478-Et
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Oct 2021 06:11:35 -0400
Received: from h87-96-130-155.cust.a3fiber.se ([87.96.130.155]:36496
helo=mail.yoctocell.xyz) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <public@HIDDEN>) id 1mZ9KH-00046v-FS
for 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Oct 2021 06:11:33 -0400
From: Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=yoctocell.xyz;
s=mail; t=1633774287;
bh=JronQ5eyINDMUY1oQQKjKzfRZnntKJQBWdEPeCUUOz0=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date;
b=TwaiH+UYe2IuFJitb9P1nPmJbBSy+dIscexLakDbhDR4JKuiolYMPAMcZ5MCS6+FA
Yg7gmgbq4OnRpZL7OVcuhW0KCY+VkbKe79hMNeGF9WUGKqAg5mwL265Iqs5tDdeKf7
haFRs9Q0QSLnlkmfXn6pomany31FgDoyYJIrYXAk=
In-Reply-To: <87v926ldvv.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <e2047d5738d30969bc766ef85ea65715954a6927.1632855961.git.public@HIDDEN>
<877devwj95.fsf@HIDDEN> <87v926ldvv.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2021 12:11:26 +0200
Message-ID: <87sfxald81.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: 2.9 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Sat, Oct 09 2021, Xinglu Chen wrote: > On Sat, Oct 02 2021,
Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
skribis: >> >>> * guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?): New procedure.
>>> (check-home-page, chec [...]
Content analysis details: (2.9 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: yoctocell.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD From abused NTLD
0.4 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to internal network by host with
dynamic-looking rDNS
0.0 PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP RDNS_DYNAMIC with FP steps
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 2.9 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Sat, Oct 09 2021, Xinglu Chen wrote: > On Sat, Oct 02 2021,
Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
skribis: >> >>> * guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?): New procedure.
>>> (check-home-page, chec [...]
Content analysis details: (2.9 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: yoctocell.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD From abused NTLD
0.4 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to internal network by host with
dynamic-looking rDNS
1.0 BULK_RE_SUSP_NTLD Precedence bulk and RE: from a suspicious TLD
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
0.0 PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP RDNS_DYNAMIC with FP steps
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Oct 09 2021, Xinglu Chen wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 02 2021, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN> skribis:
>>
>>> * guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?): New procedure.
>>> (check-home-page, check-source): Use it.
>>
>> Applied, thanks!
>
> Was it? I don=E2=80=99t see it in the log.
>
>>> I don=E2=80=99t really know how to test this while making it future-pro=
of, any
>>> suggestions?
>>
>> I don=E2=80=99t know either, since we don=E2=80=99t have an easy way to =
spin up an HTTPS
>> server. I think it=E2=80=99s okay to leave it as is, for lack of a bett=
er idea.
>>
>> However, this version of the patch leads to test failures in
>> tests/lint.scm (=E2=80=9CConnection refused=E2=80=9D).
>
> Thanks for catching this; I will look into it. Good that you didn=E2=80=
=99t
> apply it then. :-)
Hm, I am not able to reproduce this. All the tests in =E2=80=98tests/lint.=
scm=E2=80=99
pass for me.
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=vokx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: [bug#50874] [PATCH] lint: Check if HTTPS version of HTTP URL exists.
Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: guix-patches@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2021 13:13:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.50874.B50874.163387157414036 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50874
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch
To: Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN>
Cc: 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 50874-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B50874.163387157414036
(code B ref 50874); Sun, 10 Oct 2021 13:13:01 +0000
Received: (at 50874) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Oct 2021 13:12:54 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54589 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1mZYdK-0003eK-37
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 09:12:54 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44924)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1mZYdI-0003e8-66
for 50874 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 09:12:52 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:53108)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>)
id 1mZYdC-0007Ws-Ef; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 09:12:46 -0400
Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:59240
helo=ribbon)
by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>)
id 1mZYdC-0000Ml-5F; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 09:12:46 -0400
From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
References: <e2047d5738d30969bc766ef85ea65715954a6927.1632855961.git.public@HIDDEN>
<877devwj95.fsf@HIDDEN> <87v926ldvv.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2021 15:12:43 +0200
In-Reply-To: <87v926ldvv.fsf@HIDDEN> (Xinglu Chen's message of "Sat, 09
Oct 2021 11:57:08 +0200")
Message-ID: <87y271vx9w.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-)
Hi!
Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN> skribis:
> On Sat, Oct 02 2021, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Xinglu Chen <public@HIDDEN> skribis:
>>
>>> * guix/lint.scm (check-if-https-uri-exists?): New procedure.
>>> (check-home-page, check-source): Use it.
>>
>> Applied, thanks!
>
> Was it? I don=E2=80=99t see it in the log.
Actually no. :-) I initially applied it, started replying, noticed
there was a problem, and then sent that inconsistent reply.
>>> I don=E2=80=99t really know how to test this while making it future-pro=
of, any
>>> suggestions?
>>
>> I don=E2=80=99t know either, since we don=E2=80=99t have an easy way to =
spin up an HTTPS
>> server. I think it=E2=80=99s okay to leave it as is, for lack of a bett=
er idea.
>>
>> However, this version of the patch leads to test failures in
>> tests/lint.scm (=E2=80=9CConnection refused=E2=80=9D).
>
> Thanks for catching this; I will look into it. Good that you didn=E2=80=
=99t
> apply it then. :-)
Here=E2=80=99s what I see (among others):
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
test-name: home-page: 200
location: /home/ludo/src/guix/tests/lint.scm:650
source:
+ (test-equal
+ "home-page: 200"
+ '()
+ (with-http-server
+ `((200 ,%long-string))
+ (let ((pkg (package
+ (inherit (dummy-package "x"))
+ (home-page (%local-url)))))
+ (check-home-page pkg))))
expected-value: ()
actual-value: #f
actual-error:
+ (system-error
+ connect*
+ "~A"
+ ("Connection refused")
+ (111))
result: FAIL
[=E2=80=A6]
test-name: source: 200
location: /home/ludo/src/guix/tests/lint.scm:917
source:
+ (test-equal
+ "source: 200"
+ '()
+ (with-http-server
+ `((200 ,%long-string))
+ (let ((pkg (package
+ (inherit (dummy-package "x"))
+ (source
+ (origin
+ (method url-fetch)
+ (uri (%local-url))
+ (sha256 %null-sha256))))))
+ (check-source pkg))))
expected-value: ()
actual-value: #f
actual-error:
+ (system-error
+ connect*
+ "~A"
+ ("Connection refused")
+ (111))
result: FAIL
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
I believe that=E2=80=99s because, in addition to (%local-url), =E2=80=98che=
ck-home-page=E2=80=99
& co. now try to connect on port 443 of the same host, and there=E2=80=99s
nothing listening to that port on my machine.
Ludo=E2=80=99.
Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Nov 2021 08:09:47 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 23 03:09:47 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49882 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1mpQs7-0003JG-9y for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 03:09:47 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55062) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1mpQs4-0003J2-UL for control <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 03:09:46 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=37462 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1mpQrz-0006Lg-PO for control <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 03:09:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:Subject:From:To:Date:in-reply-to: references; bh=qnXlpqkxawAyqeccMuOxvCF3ZaBJqoVW+HL2h1fXSq4=; b=pYi+JjcwgZbxwf EsrStY1+T5drvEBmuM07AG36sLO/74W3XM2ncy2VMHukf3x5haSTROA0/eBAMsMydmiGkEbN4bdXa MTDmjuY1HCv94cvJqtjwXgHtgwQSTkqiESS0Q8BaCurcWPvZk5REXRGz8CFG8vzahQeKiHSh7nw+9 o+esvV9PajmmbVTo7JL8a7Isu3QhsSgDzYD8DPx+LcIbXY2vMkwo2r1xHLtbc2jivg4cxDzCdSKmR PXowyngffqe2/+WCPmZnYwt0DK2X72T3Ox1yHNeQaRuvGw8Yh0CKMi/24rbE6vuncXorlHZgsccEM CnELT/nwwhmCSFTx0lYg==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:52573 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1mpQrz-00004t-JW for control <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 03:09:39 -0500 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 09:09:36 +0100 Message-Id: <871r37mgxr.fsf@HIDDEN> To: control <at> debbugs.gnu.org From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: control message for bug #50874 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) tags 50874 + moreinfo quit
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.