Re: [coreutils] [PATCH] md5sum: Add option to ignore non-existant files

[Pádraig Brady]

On 23/11/15 07:06, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 11/22/2015 11:06 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> From f664e7e87b979503f263334caa02cc0525b77c43 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Luther Thompson <address@hidden>
>> Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 21:47:59 +0000
>> Subject: [PATCH] md5sum, sha*sum: add --ignore-missing for checking a subset
>>  of files
> 
> This requires 'git commit --no-verify'.  I thought we already have an allowed
> word for the "md5sum, sha*sum" family, but obviously we don't.
> If we add such a keyword one day - which is not easy as "*sum" would also
> match the 'cksum' and the 'sum' utilities, too - it'd be good to ensure that
> each of the afftected utils is mentioned explicitly in the lines following
> (or in the NEWS as you did here).

Good point, though it's probably overkill to verify
the expansion is mentioned elsewhere in the commit.
I'll add the following:

Author: Pádraig Brady <address@hidden>
Date:   Mon Nov 23 11:10:31 2015 +0000

    maint: allow 'sha*sum:' tag in commit summaries

    To support "md5sum,sha*sum:"
    Suggested by Bernhard Voelker.

diff --git a/scripts/git-hooks/commit-msg b/scripts/git-hooks/commit-msg
index 8e79b6c..d860f0b 100755
--- a/scripts/git-hooks/commit-msg
+++ b/scripts/git-hooks/commit-msg
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ my @valid = qw(
     sum sync tac tail tee test timeout touch tr true truncate tsort
     tty uname unexpand uniq unlink uptime users vdir wc who whoami yes

-    all copy gnulib tests maint doc build scripts
+    all copy gnulib tests maint doc build scripts sha\*sum
     );
 my $v_or = join '|', @valid;
 my $valid_regex = qr/^(?:$v_or)$/;

> While the above 4 changes in the big 'else' block are correct, I think it'd
> be easier and clearer to handle the case explicitly in one place, like:
> 
> @@ -610,6 +622,10 @@ digest_check (const char *checkfile_name)
>                    printf (": %s\n", _("FAILED open or read"));
>                  }
>              }
> +          else if (ignore_missing && ! *bin_buffer)
> +            {
> +              ;  /* Ignore actually missing file.  */
> +            }

Yes much better hoisted there.
I was mulling over outputting _("MISSING") in some cases,
but then decided against.  So therefore this check is best separated.
I'll push a bit later today.

thanks!
Pádraig.