[PATCH consfigurator v2 2/2] GPG: handle missing file separately to subprocess errors

[Sean Whitton]

Hello,

On Tue 04 Oct 2022 at 04:28PM +02, Russell Sim wrote:

> Ah, that was the source of my confusion, that comment mentions how
> things were done and how they are done.  That tripped me up.
>
> This is combined with documentation for REGISTER-DATA-SOURCE string that
> also mentions special behaviour for the MISSING-DATA-SOURCE condition.
> But judging by the CONTINUE-DEPLOY*-PROGRAM comment, this special
> behaviour doesn't exist?
>
> Is there any reason to raise this MISSING-DATA-SOURCE condition if its'
> not handled in any special way?  I could remove it entirely from
> GPG-FILE-AS-STRING?
>
> Do you see a future for the MISSING-DATA-SOURCE condition?  I don't have
> enough knowledge of the code base to make a call on that yet.

I now see that the docstring for MISSING-DATA-SOURCE could be quite
misleading about this.  Sorry about that.

I do think we want some version of this patch, and we should keep the
MISSING-DATA-SOURCE condition, because it might be useful for certain
programmatic deployments executed in the root Lisp.

The idea is that you might want to continue anyway if a data source is
just missing on this machine, but probably want to unconditionally abort
if you got an unexpected error from gpg.

-- 
Sean Whitton