cli/pack: erase temp file on failure #107
Conversation
| @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ use std::io::Read; | |||
| // this hashes the input file | |||
| // it reads it in blocks, updates the hasher, and finalises/displays the hash | |||
| // it's used by hash-standalone mode | |||
| pub fn hash_stream(files: &Vec<String>) -> Result<()> { | |||
| pub fn hash_stream(files: &[String]) -> Result<()> { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a good change - I don't know how I missed this
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks clippy for finding this :)
I'm not too sure how good of an idea it would be to move password-handling from outside of the encryption function. I understand that it's one of the sources of possible errors (when a keyfile is supplied), but I'm not too sure we should move it out. If we did, we wouldn't be able to check for missing files beforehand. One way around this could be to have a kind of "entry/validation function", something that globally checks for common mishaps. This function could check that the input file exists, checks that the keyfile exists/isn't empty, get the user's password, ask if they'd like to overwrite the output file, etc. It'd only be needed for some functions (not the header manipulation ones), but it could be an ideal way to handle this I think. The other functions could then receive the user's key, in the form of a |
I want to get the password after checking the files, but before creating the compressed file) I think this is correct) in fact for this reason I moved the walker with the file path checker to the top. |
|
Just give me a chance to finish this task :) |
|
@brxken128 actually, I think we should merge this PR ) My commit solves #99, but I want to continue in separate branch. |
| .into_iter() | ||
| .filter_map(|res| res.ok()) | ||
| .collect::<Vec<walkdir::DirEntry>>(); | ||
| // let item_data = item.context("Unable to get path of item, skipping")?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Dead code that could do with being removed :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've pushed... but I was too late
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No worries, I'll remove it in a sec :)
|
I don't have the chance to test this this myself, but the tests pass and the code looks great so I'll merge. Great work! @pleshevskiy |
Moved path validation above. Added zip archive cleanup on encryption error.
I want to move password retrieval from encryption, but it will take more time and effort)