On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 04:14:45AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 06:31:21PM -0700, Jeremiah Mahler wrote:
...
>
> A few questions/comments:
>
> > +static int signature_file_callback(const struct option *opt, const char *arg,
> > + int unset)
> > +{
> > + const char **signature = opt->value;
> > + static char buf[1024];
> > + size_t sz;
> > + FILE *fd;
> > +
> > + fd = fopen(arg, "r");
> > + if (fd) {
> > + sz = sizeof(buf);
> > + sz = fread(buf, 1, sz - 1, fd);
> > + if (sz) {
> > + buf[sz] = '\0';
> > + *signature = buf;
> > + }
> > + fclose(fd);
> > + }
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> We have routines for reading directly into a strbuf, which eliminates
> the need for this 1024-byte limit. We even have a wrapper that can make
> this much shorter:
>
> struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
>
> strbuf_read_file(&buf, arg, 128);
> *signature = strbuf_detach(&buf, NULL);
>
Yes, that is much cleaner.
The memory returned by strbuf_detach() will have to be freed as well.
> I notice that you ignore any errors. Is that intentional (so that we
> silently ignore missing --signature files)? If so, should we actually
> treat it as an empty file (e.g., in my code above, we always set
> *signature, even if the file was missing)?
>
> Finally, I suspect that:
>
> cd path/in/repo &&
> git format-patch --signature-file=foo
>
> will not work, as we chdir() to the toplevel before evaluating the
> arguments. You can fix that either by using parse-option's OPT_FILENAME
> to save the filename, followed by opening the file after all arguments
> are processed; or by manually fixing up the filename.
>
Yes, it wouldn't have worked.
Using OPT_FILENAME is a much better solution.
> Since parse-options already knows how to do this fixup (it does it for
> OPT_FILENAME), it would be nice if it were a flag rather than a full
> type, so you could specify at as an option to your callback here:
>
> > + { OPTION_CALLBACK, 0, "signature-file", &signature, N_("signature-file"),
> > + N_("add a signature from contents of a file"),
> > + PARSE_OPT_NONEG, signature_file_callback },
>
> Noticing your OPT_NONEG, though, I wonder if you should simply use an
> OPT_FILENAME. I would expect --no-signature-file to countermand any
> earlier --signature-file on the command-line (or if we eventually grow a
> config option, which seems sensible, it would tell git to ignore the
> option). The usual ordering for that is:
>
Another case is when both --signature="foo" and --no-signature-file are used.
Currently this would only negate the file option which would allow
the --signature option to be used.
> 1. Read config and store format.signatureFile as a string
> "signature_file".
>
> 2. Parse arguments. --signature-file=... sets signature_file, and
> --no-signature-file sets it to NULL.
>
> 3. If signature_file is non-NULL, load it.
>
> And I believe OPT_FILENAME will implement (2) for you.
>
> One downside of doing it this way is that you need to specify what will
> happen when both "--signature" (or format.signature) and
> "--signature-file" are set. With your current code, I think
> "--signature=foo --signature-file=bar" will take the second one. I think
> it would be fine to prefer one to the other, or to just notice that both
> are set and complain.
>
> -Peff
Having --signature-file override --signature seems simpler to implement.
The signature variable has a default value which complicates
determining whether it was set or not.
Thanks for the great suggestions.
--
Jeremiah Mahler
jmmahler@xxxxxxxxx
http://github.com/jmahler
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html