Addressing trailofbits#23, svcli: Support extracting the SignedData blobs from a PE #104
Conversation
GNUmakefile
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know GNUmakefile is technically more correct, but I'd prefer to keep it as Makefile for now -- IME the former is less common and causes more confusion for people who are less familiar with build systems and are just visually scanning the repo to find the makefile.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reasoning here was more that the name GNUmakefile will only be picked up by GNU make, whereas Makefile will be picked up by dozens of flavors of Make. And since GNU-make-isms are being used, it made sense to me. But your repo, your rules.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FWIW: I have now created a floating branch for myself, with a GNUmakefile that includes your Makefile to keep things DRY. I don't like how complicated CMake makes things and the comments in at least one of the CMakeLists.txt from trailofbits speaks volumes. Guess I'm not alone after all.
src/svcli/svcli.cpp
Outdated
| "or use - for stdout)\n"; | ||
| return 0; | ||
| } | ||
| return realmain(cmdl, extract); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Rather than breaking this into realmain, can we keep this all as one function? The realmain name isn't super descriptive + passing in both a argh::parser and a partially extracted result (extract) makes it look like a leaky abstraction.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not quite clear what it is you want. Disposing of realmain I got. But the remainder would naturally disappear then, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah -- sorry for the confusion, the second part was just me thinking out loud about why I'd prefer just one function here 🙂
hugmyndakassi
force-pushed
the
master
branch
from
667f535 to
cad1bfc
Compare
|
Sorry, I didn't close this intentionally. It was caused by the fact that I had initially meant for you to pull from my |
|
No problem, just give me a ping when the new one's open. |
As per your comment in #23 so it's more convenient to review