From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1D801FF13E for ; Fri, 06 Feb 2026 13:31:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1C0B28A8; Fri, 6 Feb 2026 13:31:44 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 13:31:39 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH container 3/3] setup: make the architecture fall back to amd64 for empty strings To: Daniel Kral , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260204091740.102914-1-d.kral@proxmox.com> <20260204091740.102914-4-d.kral@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1770381020321 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.017 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: YI5LAVRRXQNBAAEQ2BENJNUH3LPR4ZEG X-Message-ID-Hash: YI5LAVRRXQNBAAEQ2BENJNUH3LPR4ZEG X-MailFrom: f.ebner@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Am 06.02.26 um 1:11 PM schrieb Daniel Kral: > On Fri Feb 6, 2026 at 11:24 AM CET, Fiona Ebner wrote: >> Am 04.02.26 um 10:17 AM schrieb Daniel Kral: >>> Otherwise, if the underlying detect_architecture(...) method returns any >>> false value, the return value of the call to protected_call(...) will >> >> Do you mean undef value here? If I return 0 inside a protected call I get 0 >> >>> return an empty string. >> >> not an empty string. >> >> There seems to be a difference in behavior between being in a nested >> protected call, which will return the result from the $sub directly, and >> a non-nested protected call, which reads the result from the pipe, which >> also results in an empty string when the result from $sub is undef. > > Good catch, thanks! I only tried it with non-nested protected calls > which use the output from the pipe and also assumed that the empty > string comes from the conversion from a falsy value to a string in perl, > which is the empty string. Nit: should probably read "from a falsy value that does convert to an empty string in Perl". Not all falsy values do ;)