From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] test-lib.sh: fix color support when tput needs ~/.terminfo Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:25:08 -0400 Message-ID: <20150617202507.GA25234@peff.net> References: <1434567986-23552-1-git-send-email-rhansen@bbn.com> <1434567986-23552-3-git-send-email-rhansen@bbn.com> <20150617194315.GE25304@peff.net> <5581D099.7090200@bbn.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Richard Hansen X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 17 22:25:18 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5Jtc-0000WT-G1 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 22:25:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752564AbbFQUZM (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:25:12 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:47661 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751821AbbFQUZK (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:25:10 -0400 Received: (qmail 4014 invoked by uid 102); 17 Jun 2015 20:25:10 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:25:10 -0500 Received: (qmail 29179 invoked by uid 107); 17 Jun 2015 20:25:09 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:25:09 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:25:08 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5581D099.7090200@bbn.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 03:55:05PM -0400, Richard Hansen wrote: > > I do not mind it so much as you have > > it, but it does mean adding a new field needs to update two spots. > > I also don't like the duplicate list of color types, and I considered > doing something similar to what you suggested, but I decided against it. > I'm a bit worried about bizarre syntax errors or code execution if > say_color() is used improperly. ('eval' with uncontrolled variables > makes me nervous.) As Junio pointed out, I think all bets are off in the test scripts. They are running tons of arbitrary code. :) But for the record, I am fine with your patch as-is. Thanks for looking into it. -Peff