From: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>, elfutils-devel@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch git] PR28284 - debuginfod x-debuginfod* header processing
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:49:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dfddb2d9d56de2e6abd1cd4f125f1b08b578c32d.camel@klomp.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220903001304.GA20286@redhat.com>
Hi Frank,
On Fri, 2022-09-02 at 20:13 -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler via Elfutils-devel
wrote:
> I had a bit of time to tweak Noah Sanci's PR28284 work, and I believe
> it addresses Mark's last set of comments (from a while ago). This
> follow-up patch corrects things like case sensitivity, spacing, \r\n
> processing, and tweaks documentation.
I hadn't thought about the \r\n at the end of the HTTP headers. Thanks.
I assume \r\n at the end of HTTP headers required, since you are
expecting in the code now, or could it also be \n on its own?
> The gist of it is to add a new client api function
> debuginfod_get_headers(), documented to return x-debuginfod* headers
> from current or previous fetch requests.
This looks good, but I think c->winning_headers needs to be
freed/cleared at the start of debuginfod_query_server. Otherwise if you
reuse the debuginfod_client and you hit the cache, the user gets the
headers from the last use of debuginfod_client that did fetch something
from a server. Which imho is confusing (the headers won't match the
cached result returned).
> debuginfod-find prints those
> in -v verbose mode, and debuginfod relays them in federation.
This is the only thing I am not 100% happy about. It means you can only
see the headers using debuginfod-find but no longer with any other
client when DEBUGINFOD_VERBOSE is set. Is this really what we want?
> This stuff is an enabler for rgoldber's subsequent
> signature-passing/checking code, to which I plan to turn my attention
> next.
>
> Please see users/fche/try-pr28284d for this draft of the code. I'd
> like to keep it as two separate commits to preserve Noah's id in the
> git history, even though that makes it a bit harder to give a final
> review.
Thanks. I like this version except for those two nitpicks above. What
do you think?
Cheers,
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-06 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-03 0:13 Frank Ch. Eigler
2022-09-06 15:49 ` Mark Wielaard [this message]
2022-09-06 16:05 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2022-09-06 16:42 ` Ryan Goldberg
2022-09-08 11:42 ` Mark Wielaard
2022-09-08 13:45 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=dfddb2d9d56de2e6abd1cd4f125f1b08b578c32d.camel@klomp.org \
--to=mark@klomp.org \
--cc=elfutils-devel@sourceware.org \
--cc=fche@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).