banned.h: fix vsprintf warning

[andportnoy]

Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf
is expected.

[gitgitgadget]

Welcome to GitGitGadget

Hi @andportnoy, and welcome to GitGitGadget, the GitHub App to send patch series to the Git mailing list from GitHub Pull Requests.

Please make sure that this Pull Request has a good description, as it will be used as cover letter.

Also, it is a good idea to review the commit messages one last time, as the Git project expects them in a quite specific form:

• the lines should not exceed 76 columns,
• the first line should be like a header and typically start with a prefix like "tests:" or "commit:", and
• the commit messages' body should be describing the "why?" of the change.
• Finally, the commit messages should end in a Signed-off-by: line matching the commits' author.

It is in general a good idea to await the automated test ("Checks") in this Pull Request before contributing the patches, e.g. to avoid trivial issues such as unportable code.

Contributing the patches

Before you can contribute the patches, your GitHub username needs to be added to the list of permitted users. Any already-permitted user can do that, by adding a PR comment of the form /allow <username>.

Once on the list of permitted usernames, you can contribute the patches to the Git mailing list by adding a PR comment /submit.

After you submit, GitGitGadget will respond with another comment that contains the link to the cover letter mail in the Git mailing list archive. Please make sure to monitor the discussion in that thread and to address comments and suggestions.

If you do not want to subscribe to the Git mailing list just to be able to respond to a mail, you can download the mbox ("raw") file corresponding to the mail you want to reply to from the Git mailing list. If you use GMail, you can upload that raw mbox file via:

curl -g --user "<EMailAddress>:<Password>" --url "imaps://imap.gmail.com/INBOX" -T /path/to/raw.txt

[andportnoy]

Force-pushed to sign off as advised by the PR bot.

[andportnoy]

/submit

[gitgitgadget]

Error: User andportnoy is not permitted to use GitGitGadget

[dscho]

/allow andportnoy

[gitgitgadget]

User andportnoy is now allowed to use GitGitGadget.

[andportnoy]

/submit

[gitgitgadget]

Submitted as [email protected]

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

"Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:

> Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is
> expected.

Good eyes.  Thanks.


>
> Andrey Portnoy (1):
>   banned.h: fix vsprintf warning
>
>  banned.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>
> base-commit: 75b2f01a0f642b39b0f29b6218515df9b5eb798e
> Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-322%2Fandportnoy%2Ffix-vsprintf-warning-v1
> Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-322/andportnoy/fix-vsprintf-warning-v1
> Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/322

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Jeff King wrote (reply to this):

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 09:24:10AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> "Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> > Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is
> > expected.
> 
> Good eyes.  Thanks.

There's an identical patch in:

  https://public-inbox.org/git/cab687db8315dd4245e1703402a8c76218ee1115.1566762128.git.me@ttaylorr.com/

and both were inspired by:

  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20793298

whose author has little info there, but I think is separate from either
submitter.

I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers.
"Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)

Anyway, the original bug is mine and the patch is obviously correct.

-Peff

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Taylor Blau wrote (reply to this):

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 02:33:17PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 09:24:10AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > "Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> > > Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where vsprintf is
> > > expected.
> >
> > Good eyes.  Thanks.
>
> There's an identical patch in:
>
>   https://public-inbox.org/git/cab687db8315dd4245e1703402a8c76218ee1115.1566762128.git.me@ttaylorr.com/

Thanks for mentioning. I did send mine in around a day ago now, but it
came in on a Sunday, so it makes sense that Andrey's message may have
appeared earlier in mailboxes when looking today.

I don't really mind about the credit, nor do I think there's much value
in crediting you or me with 'Racily-implemented-by'. My patch has a few
more details such as blame information (and how the typo was only made
in the explicit version, not the variadic form), so it may be worthwhile
to take that instead of this, but I don't mind either way.

> and both were inspired by:
>
>   https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20793298

Indeed. It was a little surprising to see 'banned.h' at the top of
Hacker News when I checked it this weekend :-).

> whose author has little info there, but I think is separate from either
> submitter.
>
> I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers.
> "Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)
>
> Anyway, the original bug is mine and the patch is obviously correct.
>
> -Peff

Yep.

Thanks,
Taylor

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Andrey Portnoy wrote (reply to this):

> On Aug 26, 2019, at 11:33 AM, Jeff King <[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 09:24:10AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>=20
>> "Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:
>>=20
>>> Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where =
vsprintf is
>>> expected.
>>=20
>> Good eyes.  Thanks.
>=20
> There's an identical patch in:
>=20
>  =
https://public-inbox.org/git/cab687db8315dd4245e1703402a8c76218ee1115.1566=
[email protected]/
>=20
> and both were inspired by:
>=20
>  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3D20793298
Nope, mine was not =E2=80=9Cinspired by=E2=80=9D that comment, noticed =
the bug myself. I did look at this header because it was posted on HN, =
though.
>=20
> whose author has little info there, but I think is separate from =
either
> submitter.
>=20
> I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers.
> "Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)
>=20
> Anyway, the original bug is mine and the patch is obviously correct.
>=20
> -Peff
>=20

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Andrey Portnoy wrote (reply to this):

> On Aug 26, 2019, at 11:33 AM, Jeff King <[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 09:24:10AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>=20
>> "Andrey Portnoy via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:
>>=20
>>> Previously sprintf was the argument to the BANNED macro, where =
vsprintf is
>>> expected.
>>=20
>> Good eyes.  Thanks.
>=20
> There's an identical patch in:
>=20
> =
https://public-inbox.org/git/cab687db8315dd4245e1703402a8c76218ee1115.1566=
[email protected]/
>=20
> and both were inspired by:
>=20
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3D20793298
Nope, mine was not =E2=80=9Cinspired by=E2=80=9D that comment, noticed =
the bug myself. I did look at this header because it was posted on HN, =
though.
>=20
> whose author has little info there, but I think is separate from =
either
> submitter.
>=20
> I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers.
> "Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)
>=20
> Anyway, the original bug is mine and the patch is obviously correct.
>=20
> -Peff
>=20

[gitgitgadget]

This branch is now known as tb/banned-vsprintf-namefix.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@9e6bbff.

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

Taylor Blau <[email protected]> writes:

> ... My patch has a few
> more details such as blame information (and how the typo was only made
> in the explicit version, not the variadic form), so it may be worthwhile
> to take that instead of this, but I don't mind either way.

Yup, that was exactly why I took that version (after tentatively
queuing the other one, but discarded before pushing the integration
result out).

Thanks, all.

>> I don't know if we want to try to spread credit around via trailers.
>> "Racily-implemented-by:" ? :)

Please don't X-<.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@f7f40e4.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@d04406d.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@12f12fc.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@024bf27.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into next via git@e0f6d18.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@bb5d4ee.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@f0ace75.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@1e208eb.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@be13edb.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@37801f0.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into master via git@37801f0.

[gitgitgadget]

Closed via 37801f0.