Re: [PATCH/RFC] builtin/tag.c: move PGP verification inside builtin.

2016-03-24 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 06:32:58PM -0400, Santiago Torres wrote: > > But I notice that we already handle SIGPIPE explicitly in sign_buffer() > > for similar reasons. What I was wondering earlier was whether we should > > teach other functions that call gpg (like verify_signed_buffer()) to > >

Re: [PATCH/RFC] builtin/tag.c: move PGP verification inside builtin.

2016-03-24 Thread Santiago Torres
> > This is my first stab at this, in the dumbest/simplest way imaginable. I > > don't like that there is no code reuse (the run_gpg_verify function is > > repeated here and in the plumbing command). I would appreciate pointers > > on what would be the best way to avoid this. > > It looks to me

Re: [PATCH/RFC] builtin/tag.c: move PGP verification inside builtin.

2016-03-24 Thread Santiago Torres
> I know you are just copying this from the one in builtin/verify-tag.c, > but I find the use of "size" and "len" for two different purposes > confusing. Those words are synonyms, so how do the variables differ? > > Perhaps "payload_size", or "signature_offset" would be a better term for > "len".

Re: [PATCH/RFC] builtin/tag.c: move PGP verification inside builtin.

2016-03-24 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 05:51:05PM -0400, Santiago Torres wrote: > Sorry for the delay with this, I got caught up with coursework. No problem. The project moves forward as contributor time permits. > This is my first stab at this, in the dumbest/simplest way imaginable. I > don't like that

Re: [PATCH/RFC] builtin/tag.c: move PGP verification inside builtin.

2016-03-24 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 05:39:20PM -0400, santi...@nyu.edu wrote: > +static int run_gpg_verify(const char *buf, unsigned long size, unsigned > flags) > +{ > + struct signature_check sigc; > + int len; > + int ret; > + > + memset(, 0, sizeof(sigc)); > + > + len =

Re: [PATCH/RFC] builtin/tag.c: move PGP verification inside builtin.

2016-03-24 Thread Santiago Torres
Hi Jeff. Sorry for the delay with this, I got caught up with coursework. This is my first stab at this, in the dumbest/simplest way imaginable. I don't like that there is no code reuse (the run_gpg_verify function is repeated here and in the plumbing command). I would appreciate pointers on what

[PATCH/RFC] builtin/tag.c: move PGP verification inside builtin.

2016-03-24 Thread santiago
From: Santiago Torres The verify tag function is just a thin wrapper around the verify-tag command. We can avoid one fork call by doing the verification instide the tag builtin instead. Signed-off-by: Santiago Torres --- builtin/tag.c | 44