Problem/Motivation

Error: Call to undefined method Drupal\computed_field\Field\FieldStorageDefinition::getThirdPartySetting() in Drupal\field_encrypt\ProcessEntities->getEncryptedFields() (line 215 of modules/contrib/field_encrypt/src/ProcessEntities.php).

Drupal\field_encrypt\ProcessEntities->entitySetCacheTags() (Line: 117)
Drupal\field_encrypt\Hook\FieldEncryptHooks->entityView()
call_user_func_array() (Line: 355)
Drupal\Core\Extension\ModuleHandler->{closure:Drupal\Core\Extension\ModuleHandler::invokeAll():354}() (Line: 307)
Drupal\Core\Extension\ModuleHandler->invokeAllWith() (Line: 354)
Drupal\Core\Extension\ModuleHandler->invokeAll() (Line: 289)
Drupal\Core\Entity\EntityViewBuilder->buildMultiple() (Line: 239)
Drupal\Core\Entity\EntityViewBuilder->build()

Steps to reproduce

Proposed resolution

Remaining tasks

User interface changes

API changes

Data model changes

Comments

mlncn created an issue. See original summary.

mlncn’s picture

Proposed a workaround in Field Encryt: #3517810: Error when computed_field module fields are present

But that does not mean Computed Field should not be providing this setting (empty by default?) in case other modules are also expecting it.

mlncn’s picture

(i will note that Module Builder does not currently composer install for me, Drupal 11 and PHP 8.4 and maybe something else causing incompatible dependencies, so if this or other things are taken care of when using Module Builder as documented such things still need to be documented independently)

joachim’s picture

> i will note that Module Builder does not currently composer install for me, Drupal 11 and PHP 8.4 and maybe something else causing incompatible dependencies

Could you file an issue on Module Builder for that please?

joachim’s picture

Status: Active » Closed (works as designed)

\Drupal\computed_field\Field\FieldStorageDefinition is for bundle fields defined in code, so it's correct that it doesn't have third-party settings, as those are for config entities. The other module is making an incorrect assumption about bundle fields -- see my comment over there.