[vlc-devel] [PATCH v2 13/13] vorepository: use vlc_MakeTmpFile (thus mkstemp) instead of tempnam

[Lyndon Brown]

On Tue, 2020-10-06 at 22:41 +0300, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le tiistaina 6. lokakuuta 2020, 22.14.14 EEST Lyndon Brown a écrit :
> > All I'm doing here is micro-targetting the cause of the build
> > warning
> > about use of tempnam().
> 
> Nobody will or can force you to fix warnings. But if you're not going
> to fix 
> them properly, leave them be for someone else to fix.

I don't think that's a very fair comment. I *am* attempting to
"properly" fix those that I tackle, or at the very least improve
things. I put in effort here to implement a solution built upon use of
a close equivalent to the problematic function, which fundamentally
*is* a "proper" solution to the problem. Not identifying a better
solution, if there is one to find, due to lack of time or
understanding, doesn't make the solution I've offered any less of a
"proper" fix, just not necessarily the best.

I am certainly not refusing to fix any issues with my solution. I'm not
trying to waste our time here. I'm trying to put together something
that stands a reasonable chance of being accepted, as with all my work.

I've noted your feedback, that in this case you don't believe that we
really need a FS entry for the vorepository instance. My understanding
of that, as I said, suggests that vlc_memfd might thus be what you have
in mind as a better alternative than trying to switch to mkstemp. I
expect that this would be very trivial for me to implement as an
alternative patch to #13 here, and I'm perfectly willing to try it. If
you can just confirm that this is correct and is what you want then
I'll see about tackling it.

I may have misread your previous comment perhaps; I wasn't sure whether
you might otherwise be questioning the whole use of the temporary file,
and thus considering re-engineering things to get rid of it. On that
basis I felt that if this is where you wanted to take things then it
was stepping well outside of the scope of work I was attempting and
taking me a little "out of my depth" with my current understanding of
that module's code, thus suggesting that I'd quite possibly need to
"tap out" and let someone else do that work.