Re: [PATCH 4/3] archive: specfile syntax change: "$Format:%PLCHLDR$" instead of just "%PLCHLDR"
From: Johannes Schindelin <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:43:33
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2016-06-15 · Re: [PATCH 4/3] archive: specfile syntax change: "$Format:%PLCHLDR$" instead of just "%PLCHLDR" · Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Hi, On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, René Scharfe wrote:
As suggested by Johannes, --pretty=format: placeholders in specfiles need to be wrapped in $Format:...$ now.
Thanks.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/builtin-archive.c b/builtin-archive.c index faccce3..a8a0f01 100644 --- a/builtin-archive.c +++ b/builtin-archive.c@@ -81,14 +81,58 @@ static int run_remote_archiver(const char *remote, int argc, return !!rv; } +static void *format_specfile(const struct commit *commit, const char *format, + unsigned long *sizep)
Should this not be "char *buffer" instead of "const char *format"? Or even better: a "struct strbuf *"?
+{
+ unsigned long len = *sizep, result_len = 0;
+ const char *a = format;
+ char *result = NULL;
+
+ for (;;) {
+ const char *b, *c;
+ char *fmt, *formatted = NULL;
+ unsigned long a_len, fmt_len, formatted_len, allocated = 0;Maybe initialise formatted_len, just to be on the safe side?
+ + b = memchr(a, '$', len); + if (!b || a + len < b + 9 || memcmp(b + 1, "Format:", 7)) + break;
Wouldn't memmem(buffer, len, "$Format:", 8) be better here? A general comment: since you plan to output the result into a file anyway, it should be even easier to avoid realloc(), and do a print_formatted_specfile() instead of a format_specfile(), no? Ciao, Dscho