IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
This reverts commit 8a07b4033e.
The tests are kept. test-networkd-conf is adjusted to pass.
This fixes#13276. I think current rules are extremely confusing, as the
case in test-networkd-conf shows. We apply some kinds of unescaping (relating
to quoting), but not others (related to escaping of special characters).
But fixing this is hard, because people have adjusted quoting to match
our rules, and if we make the rules "better", things might break in unexpected
places.
It's hard to even say what exactly this combination means. Escaping is
necessary when quoting to have quotes within the string. So the escaping of
quote characters is inherently tied to quoting. When unquoting, it seems
natural to remove escaping which was done for the quoting purposes. But with
both flags we would be expected to re-add this escaping after unqouting? Or
maybe keep the escaping which is not necessary for quoting but otherwise
present? This all seems too complicated, let's just forbid such usage and
always fully unescape when unquoting.
Whenever I see EXTRACT_QUOTES, I'm always confused whether it means to
leave the quotes in or to take them out. Let's say "unquote", like we
say "cunescape".
These lines are generally out-of-date, incomplete and unnecessary. With
SPDX and git repository much more accurate and fine grained information
about licensing and authorship is available, hence let's drop the
per-file copyright notice. Of course, removing copyright lines of others
is problematic, hence this commit only removes my own lines and leaves
all others untouched. It might be nicer if sooner or later those could
go away too, making git the only and accurate source of authorship
information.
This part of the copyright blurb stems from the GPL use recommendations:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.en.html
The concept appears to originate in times where version control was per
file, instead of per tree, and was a way to glue the files together.
Ultimately, we nowadays don't live in that world anymore, and this
information is entirely useless anyway, as people are very welcome to
copy these files into any projects they like, and they shouldn't have to
change bits that are part of our copyright header for that.
hence, let's just get rid of this old cruft, and shorten our codebase a
bit.
Files which are installed as-is (any .service and other unit files, .conf
files, .policy files, etc), are left as is. My assumption is that SPDX
identifiers are not yet that well known, so it's better to retain the
extended header to avoid any doubt.
I also kept any copyright lines. We can probably remove them, but it'd nice to
obtain explicit acks from all involved authors before doing that.
This macro will read a pointer of any type, return it, and set the
pointer to NULL. This is useful as an explicit concept of passing
ownership of a memory area between pointers.
This takes inspiration from Rust:
https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/option/enum.Option.html#method.take
and was suggested by Alan Jenkins (@sourcejedi).
It drops ~160 lines of code from our codebase, which makes me like it.
Also, I think it clarifies passing of ownership, and thus helps
readability a bit (at least for the initiated who know the new macro)
../src/basic/extract-word.c:255:22: warning: passing an object that undergoes default argument promotion to 'va_start' has undefined behavior [-Wvarargs]
va_start(ap, flags);
^
../src/basic/extract-word.c:244:77: note: parameter of type 'ExtractFlags' (aka 'enum ExtractFlags') is declared here
int extract_many_words(const char **p, const char *separators, ExtractFlags flags, ...) {
^
../src/basic/extract-word.c:286:22: warning: passing an object that undergoes default argument promotion to 'va_start' has undefined behavior [-Wvarargs]
va_start(ap, flags);
^
../src/basic/extract-word.c:244:77: note: parameter of type 'ExtractFlags' (aka 'enum ExtractFlags') is declared here
int extract_many_words(const char **p, const char *separators, ExtractFlags flags, ...) {
^
2 warnings generated.
I think the relevant part of C99 is 6.7.2.2 Enumeration specifiers:
Each enumerated type shall be compatible with char, a signed integer type, or
an unsigned integer type. The choice of type is implementation-defined, but
shall be capable of representing the values of all the members of the
enumeration.
and 7.16.1.4:
The parameter parmN is the identifier of the rightmost parameter in the
variable parameter list in the function definition (the one just before the
...). If the parameter parmN is declared with the register storage class, with
a function or array type, or with a type that is not compatible with the type
that results after application of the default argument promotions, the behavior
is undefined.
This might cause a real issue if the compiler chooses something that is not an
integer for ExtractFlags. Rework the code to avoid the warning, but add an
assert_cc in a large-valued ExtractFlags element is ever defined and the type
is bumped to something wider than an int.
Our warning message was misleading, because we wouldn't "correct" anything,
we'd just ignore unkown escapes. Update the message.
Also, print just the extracted word (which contains the offending sequences) in
the message, instead of the whole line.
Fixes#4697.
Throughout the tree there's spurious use of spaces separating ++ and --
operators from their respective operands. Make ++ and -- operator
consistent with the majority of existing uses; discard the spaces.
rework C11 utf8.[ch] to use char32_t instead of uint32_t when referring
to unicode chars, to make things more expressive.
[
@zonque:
* rebased to current master
* use AC_CHECK_DECLS to detect availibility of char{16,32}_t
* make utf8_encoded_to_unichar() return int
]
Not every byte sequence is valid utf8. We allow escaping of non-utf8
sequences in strings by using octal and hexadecimal escape sequences
(\123 and \0xAB) for bytes at or above 128. Users of cunescape_one
could infer whether such use occured when they received an answer
between 128 and 256 in *ret (a non-ascii one byte character). But this
is subtle and misleading: the comments were wrong, because ascii is a
subset of unicode, so c != 0 did not mean non-unicode, but rather
ascii-subset-of-unicode-or-raw-byte. This was all rather confusing, so
make the "single byte" condition explicit.
I'm not convinced that allowing non-utf8 sequences to be produced is
useful in all cases where we allow it (e.g. in config files), but that
behaviour is unchanged, just made more explicit.
This also fixes an (invalid) gcc warning about unitialized variable
(*ret_unicode) in callers of cunescape_one.
3d793d2905 broke parsing of unit file
names that include backslashes, as extract_first_word() strips those.
Fix this, by introducing a new EXTRACT_RETAIN_ESCAPE flag which disables
looking at any flags, thus being compatible with the classic
FOREACH_WORD() behaviour.
Just skip them in place, instead of setting separator=true. We only do
that in a single place (while finding a separator outside of quote or
backslash states) so we don't really need a separate state for it.
Tested that no regressions were introduced in test-extract-word. Ran a
full `make check` and also installed the binaries on a test system and
did not see any issues related to parsing unit files or starting units
after a reboot.
Use inner loops to keep processing the same state, except when there is
a state change, then break back to the outer loop so that the correct
branch can be selected again.
Tested that no regressions were introduced in test-extract-word.
This will make it easier to use inner loops to keep looping in the same
state, by just updating p and c in the same way in the inner loops.
Tested that no regressions were created in test-extract-word.
Using `goto` might be appropriate for the "finish" cases but it was
really not necessary at this point of the code... Just use if/else
blocks to accomplish the same.
Confirmed that the test cases in test-extract-word keep working as
expected.
This block runs once before all the other handling, so move it outside
the main loop and put it in its own loop until it's finished doing its
job.
Tested by confirming `make check` (and particularly test-extract-word)
still passes and by booting a system with binaries including this
commit.
- Really warn in all error cases, not just some. We need to make sure
that all errors are logged to not confuse the user.
- Explicitly check for EINVAL error code before claiming anything about
invalid escapes, could be ENOMEM after all.
