On Sat, 19 Apr 2014 at 18:56:34, Von Welch wrote: > Jason, all, > > I've added a few more tests, enough to to find a few more issues. I'm going > to pause at this point and wait for feedback to see if we agree this is the > right path before doing more. The basic approach seems solid to me with a > few small issues/questions to resolve: > > 1) Unencrypted GPG key vs GPG-agent. Except for some weirdness with 'pass > init' with an unencrypted gpg key and a closed stdin, an unencrypted key > seems to work well. It seems simpler than getting a gpg-agent running. > Acceptable or do we really want to use an agent for testing? >
I would say it is fine to use an unencrypted key -- at least for the very basic tests. > 2) "Building" pass. I figured out I really needed a version of the pass > script to test with that has the platform-specific stuff replaced. > Currently 'make install' is the only way to create a fully-functional pass > script, but I don't want to require installation for testing. Hence in my > branch I split the 'make install' process into 'make' which creates the > platform-specific script and 'make install' which installs it. This lets > you run 'make && make tests' without an install (actually 'make tests' will > do a 'make' if needed, but you get the idea.) Sound reasonable? > Sounds good to me. However, the current Makefile adds a reference to "/usr/lib/password-store.platform.sh" (shouldn't that rather be "/usr/lib/password-store/platform.sh"?) to the shell script. So simply splitting the Makefile target won't work. What I suggest is: * Rename password-store.sh to password-store.sh.in. * Use m4 (or some other tool) to inline the correct platform-specific code into password-store.sh.in and save the modified file as password-store.sh when running `make`. * Just install(1) the files when running `make install`. > 3) 'pass insert' requires interactivity. It insists on asking for the > password twice even if stdin is not a terminal (a pipe). We'll either need > to change that behavior, find some clever way of working around it for > testing, or just decide it's not part of the test suite. > What about `echo $secret | pass insert -e $pw`? Doesn't that work? > 4) Going further with regards to interactivity, I have no idea how to test > 'pass edit' at this point. I guess one could create a vimscript or > something similar to simulate a user typing? Or just not worry about it for > the test suite. > How about just doing something like `EDITOR=magic.sh pass edit`, where magic.sh is a shell script that uses sed(1) to modify the password? > Von > [...] _______________________________________________ Password-Store mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/password-store
