r18699 - gnucash/trunk - Ensure that GNC_DOT_PATH and other gnc_dotgnucash_dir() logic is

[John Ralls]

On Feb 28, 2010, at 5:20 AM, Christian Stimming wrote:

> Dear John,
> 
> Am Freitag, 26. Februar 2010 schrieb Phil Longstaff:
>> On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 17:01 -0500, John Ralls wrote:
>>> Author: jralls
>>> Date: 2010-02-20 17:01:05 -0500 (Sat, 20 Feb 2010)
>>> New Revision: 18699
>>> Trac: http://svn.gnucash.org/trac/changeset/18699
>>> Log:
>>>    Ensure that GNC_DOT_PATH and other gnc_dotgnucash_dir() logic is
>>>    used for all cases, remove hard-coded references to /usr/etc,
>> 
>> I think this change introduced bug 610707: attempting SaveAs to XML file
>> resulted in sqlite3 file.
>> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=610707
> 
> I think if bug#610707 is caused by your commit, it is most likely only due to 
> the following hunk:
> 
>> @@ -338,15 +228,6 @@ xaccResolveURL (const char * pathfrag)
>> 	}
>>  }
>>  g_list_free(list);
>> -
>> -  /* "file:" and "xml:" are handled specially */
>> -  if (!g_ascii_strncasecmp (pathfrag, "file:", 5)) {
>> -    return (xaccResolveFilePath (pathfrag));
>> -  }
>> -  if (!g_ascii_strncasecmp (pathfrag, "xml:", 4)) {
>> -    return (g_strdup_printf( "xml:%s", xaccResolveFilePath (pathfrag)) );
>> -  }
>> -
>>  return (xaccResolveFilePath (pathfrag));
>> }
> 
> By your r18699 commit, this "xml: is handled specially" was removed. Maybe 
> only this part needs to be added again and all is fine?
> 

Christian,

Yes, Phil pointed that out a couple of days ago on the bug, and I made that change and tested it yesterday. I'll recommit with the fix today and close the bug. (I reverted 18699 while I worked on it.)

Both of these functions (xaccResolveFilePath and xaccResolveURI) trouble me, though. For most cases, they're no-ops, because they just return their argument unchanged or not meaningfully changed -- and they do very little checking. I decided that it would be too off-topic to rewrite their calling functions, so I wrote comments explaining what they do -- which should discourage their use because it's generally nothing.

Regards,
John Ralls