-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11.3k
Conversation
class Testssl < Formula | ||
desc "Tool which checks for the support of TLS/SSL ciphers and flaws" | ||
homepage "https://testssl.sh/" | ||
url "https://github.com/jsarenik/testssl.sh/releases/download/v2.6/testssl-2.6.tar.gz" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This should be using the upstream release, not your own personal fork. Most of the audit errors are related to that.
@DomT4 Thanks much for the feedback! I really appreciate it. Please have a look now. |
def install | ||
bin.install "testssl.sh" | ||
end | ||
end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can a test be added to do something more substantial than e.g. --version
or --help
? See cmake.rb
for an example of an application formula with a good test and tinyxml2.rb
for an example of a library formula with a good test. Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for ideas. testssl.sh
is not a library so that I could test if it's present and usable by compiling some code. It's normally used as an online test.
But what about running testssl.sh --local
? That seems like a reasonable way to test things are working.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yup, --local
seems fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Online tests are also fine.
Given there's no configure/make process here, we're just installing an executable, and our OpenSSL isn't regularly available in the Looking at the script we should probably wrap it in a
|
|
@DomT4 What about patching
|
@jsarenik Using a wrapper script would be preferable to patching. |
Yeah, wrapper script will probably be more robust here. |
Thanks for feedback! What about this try? I can squash it, just let me know. Have a nice weekend! |
Thanks for your contribution to Homebrew! Without people like you submitting PRs we couldn't run this project. You rock! For future reference the preferred commit message format for new formulae is |
drwetter/testssl.sh#233