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
> > ignore SIGPIPE, too, so that we can return a reasonable error value
> > rather than just killing the whole program.
>
> Now I get it I think this should be easy to achieve by moving
> verify_tag() to tag.c, along with the static run_gpg_verify functions.
Exactly.
> I could move the SIGPIPE call inside the verify-tag command and patch up
> everything accordingly. Does this sound ok?
I think that works, but take note of two things:
- convert it to sigchain_push(), and make sure you sigchain_pop() it
when you are done, so that the caller retains their original SIGPIPE
behavior after the function returns. See the example in
sign_buffer().
- you should probably do it as close to the gpg call as possible, so
as to affect as little code as possible. So probably in
verify_signed_buffer(), not in verify_tag().
-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
