Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use codeclysm/extract and remove custom implementation #867

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Dec 18, 2023
Merged

Conversation

umbynos
Copy link
Contributor

@umbynos umbynos commented Dec 7, 2023

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements

  • The PR has no duplicates (please search among the Pull Requests
    before creating one)
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
  • What kind of change does this PR introduce?

enhancement/security

  • What is the current behavior?

We use codeclysm/extract in our arduino GOLang projects. This is the only one that is using a custom implementation for extracting files.

  • What is the new behavior?

Use codeclysm/extract which already include security fixes (codeclysm/extract#14)

  • Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

Nop

  • Other information:

@umbynos umbynos added type: enhancement Proposed improvement topic: security Related to the protection of user data labels Dec 7, 2023
@umbynos umbynos self-assigned this Dec 7, 2023
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Dec 7, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 15 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (9d362b2) 19.68% compared to head (37e9e8e) 20.59%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
tools/download.go 62.50% 10 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #867      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   19.68%   20.59%   +0.90%     
==========================================
  Files          46       46              
  Lines        3672     3467     -205     
==========================================
- Hits          723      714       -9     
+ Misses       2855     2653     -202     
- Partials       94      100       +6     
Flag Coverage Δ
unit 20.59% <62.50%> (+0.90%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link

@rhpco rhpco left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

The tools are the one coming with the cores installed in the builder
@umbynos umbynos force-pushed the ex-tract branch 2 times, most recently from 9ea870a to 37e9e8e Compare December 18, 2023 10:26
Copy link
Contributor

@alessio-perugini alessio-perugini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

great work!

@umbynos umbynos merged commit fa8874f into main Dec 18, 2023
42 checks passed
@umbynos umbynos deleted the ex-tract branch December 18, 2023 11:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
topic: security Related to the protection of user data type: enhancement Proposed improvement
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants