Am 18.01.2018 um 23:40 schrieb SZEDER Gábor: > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:40 PM, René Scharfe <l....@web.de> wrote: >> Am 16.01.2018 um 18:11 schrieb SZEDER Gábor: >>> Unfortunately, most of the changes coming from 'strbuf.cocci' don't >>> make any sense, they appear to be the mis-application of the "use >>> strbuf_addstr() instead of strbuf_addf() to add a single string" rule: >>> >>> - strbuf_addf(&sb_repo, "%d", counter); >>> + strbuf_addstr(&sb_repo, counter); >>> >>> It seems that those rules need some refinement, but I have no idea >>> about Coccinelle and this is not the time for me to dig deeper. >>> >>> What makes all this weird is that running 'make coccicheck' on my own >>> machine doesn't produce any of these additional proposed changes, just >>> like at René's. Can it be related to differing Coccinelle versions? >>> Travis CI installs 1.0.0~rc19.deb-3; I have 1.0.4.deb-2. >> >> The version difference may explain it, but I couldn't find a matching >> bugfix in http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/distrib/changes.html when I just >> skimmed it. I wonder if the following patch could make a difference: > > Yes, it does, now all those nonsense suggestions are gone on Travis CI.
I would have expected matching a literal "%s" to be easier than dissecting that (admittedly simple) format string, but if it all works out fine then I'm not complaining. :) Sent the patch again properly. > https://travis-ci.org/szeder/git/jobs/330572425#L713 > > Those "memmove() -> MOVE_ARRAY" suggestions are still there, of course. They look valid and nice to have in that report. I wonder why we don't get them locally, though. Are you going to submit them as a patch? (NB: The patches generated by coccicheck apply with "patch -p0", unlike those generated by git diff and friends.) Thanks, René
