Re: header signatures for hash transition?

From: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Date: Sep 9, 2024, 09:44 UTC
Message-ID: <Zt7Deq2vzZKSTbfU@tapette.crustytoothpaste.net>
In-Reply-To: <20240908233636.GA4026999@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On 2024-09-08 at 23:36:36, Jeff King wrote:

> Is this a direction that we were going to go in, but ultimately didn't?
> Or is it something that just hasn't yet been fully implemented?

I had not intended to add more functionality here. I don't recall what I was doing, but I think we either needed to parse this for some set of atoms somewhere or I had intended to replace all callers with `parse_signature` instead of `parse_signed_buffer`.

I remember briefly working on this code and that it was a bear to get working, but not anything more than that.

Show 8 quoted lines

> We still separately find the start of the in-body signature and return a
> "size_t nonsiglen", though it's a bit awkward (it's counting from the
> body start, and I am coming from the subject start, but if we assume
> they're contiguous, it's just a little pointer math). So if this
> approach is still useful in the long run, I can work around it. But my
> initial approach (before digging in the history) was to drop the
> separate buffer, something like the patch below, since it also drops
> some useless extra copying of the tag contents.

It was probably that this code was to fix one or more of the signature-related atoms in the tests, but I can't speak to it more than that. I trust that you'll make a suitable change that fixes the issue, but I'm afraid I can't be more help than that.

-- 
brian m. carlson (they/them or he/him)
Toronto, Ontario, CA