On 29. 09. 21 14:48, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 1:53 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 25. 09. 21 11:12, Fabio Valentini wrote:
So, if I understand correctly, the problem is that right now there's
no *existing* tool that reliably detects if a given "executable" (has
mode +x) is an actual executable "script" with a valid shebang?
- We need to detect "scripts" that are executable but have no shebnag.
- We need to detect "scripts" that are executable and have a shebnag to mangle.
- We might want to detect binary files that are executable but shouldn't be
(such as images), but this was not the original purpose of the BRP script.
If I gave you a program /usr/bin/isexec that determines if a file is a
valid executable, i.e.
- ELF binary with ELF header / magic number,
- PE binary with MZ magic number,
- script with shebang line (whether in need of mangling or not),
would that help?
(I.e. something like this POC: https://github.com/ironthree/isexec ?)
I am not sure I want to throw in a one-man-maintained rust program into the
mixture. This could open can of worms, e.g.:
- bus factor = 1
- RHEL maintainer wiling to maintain this in RHEL 10 = 0
- no "full" architecture support
- (possibly?) larger dependency chain just to build this
But even ignoring this, we still need to detect "scripts without shebangs".
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
