Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] credential-cache: respect request capabilities

From: "brian m. carlson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:05:12 +0000

On 2025-01-06 at 22:57:06, M Hickford wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 22:32, brian m. carlson
> <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >
> > On 2025-01-06 at 19:52:11, M Hickford via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > > From: M Hickford <[email-masked]>
> > > diff --git a/builtin/credential-cache--daemon.c b/builtin/credential-cache--daemon.c
> > > index bc22f5c6d24..692216cf83c 100644
> > > --- a/builtin/credential-cache--daemon.c
> > > +++ b/builtin/credential-cache--daemon.c
> > > @@ -134,17 +134,16 @@ static void serve_one_client(FILE *in, FILE *out)
> > >       else if (!strcmp(action.buf, "get")) {
> > >               struct credential_cache_entry *e = lookup_credential(&c);
> > >               if (e) {
> > > -                     e->item.capa_authtype.request_initial = 1;
> > > -                     e->item.capa_authtype.request_helper = 1;
> > > -
> > > -                     fprintf(out, "capability[]=authtype\n");
> > > +                     if (credential_has_capability(&c.capa_authtype, CREDENTIAL_OP_RESPONSE)) {
> > > +                             fprintf(out, "capability[]=authtype\n");
> > > +                     }
> >
> > This part is not correct.
> 
> Thanks for the review. I'll revert this part and amend the commit message.

I applied this without that change and it does still pass the test,
which I think is good and shows that can be omitted.  If I have some
time, I may send a follow-up patch to add some additional tests.
-- 
brian m. carlson (they/them or he/him)
Toronto, Ontario, CA