The patches don't apply to the devel branch. You've made patches on top of the master branch, but the master branch of Bash is just a release branch, where each commit corresponds to a release. You should normally work based on the devel branch.
2024年5月5日(日) 18:56 Matheus Afonso Martins Moreira <matheus.a.m.more...@gmail.com>: > Extract into a dedicated helper function the code which loads > [...] This patch is independent of the present change for the source option. This is unrelated. Also, you've factored out one function from `source_builtin(...)' and moved another function and it to common.c. However, the new function `execute_file_contents' is still called from only one place of the original location. I think you will not be satisfied by just this comment, so I'd explain it in more detail. By exposing this function in `common.h', this effectively becomes a part of the public interface for loadable builtins. However, this abstraction is not motivated by the actual use cases. Without any actual uses, we cannot make sure this specific way of abstraction (such as the set of parameters that the function should receive) would be fine. There is a possibility that we want to later add other parameters after seeing the actual uses. However, once it becomes a part of the public interface, we wouldn't be able to modify it later easily. Otherwise, a loadable builtin makes the process crash. Then, you'll have to prepare `execute_file_contents_v2(...)' or something when the actual use cases reveal a necessity of new parameters or a change of the interface. I think this is a premature abstraction and should be avoided. At least the new function should still be defined in `builtins/source.def' with the static keyword, but even that way, the change is completely unrelated to the addition of the new flag to the source builtin. You might try to claim the usefulness or the validity of this change, but I don't have any objection to its usefulness. It's not the problem of usefulness. > Signed-off-by: Matheus Afonso Martins Moreira <math...@matheusmoreira.com> To what you are signing off... By putting this line, you imply that you agree on the rules that the project defines for copyright, etc., but Bash doesn't specify it as far as I know. Then, you've signed off what you haven't even checked the existence. Instead, FSF requires the copyright assignment to FSF (which is more strict than just e.g. DCO or anything), which shouldn't be exempted just by "Signed-off-by". Once the patches are accepted with a non-trivial amount of codes, Chet will explain it to you.
