From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 659CC9E241
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 11:12:34 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3FF724781
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 11:12:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 11:12:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7CE6944998
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 11:12:03 +0100 (CET)
References: <20231120081630.53770-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
 <1701076239.pskhtz7vig.astroid@yuna.none>
User-agent: mu4e 1.10.7; emacs 29.1
From: Maximiliano Sandoval <m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 11:09:33 +0100
In-reply-to: <1701076239.pskhtz7vig.astroid@yuna.none>
Message-ID: <s8ocyvvmroy.fsf@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.002 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox v2 1/2] sys: Use safe wrapper for
 libc::isatty
X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 10:12:34 -0000


Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> writes:

> do we still need these two? I assume everything calling this would then
> do something with stdin/stdout anyway, and could just as well call
> is_terminal() on them? might be a candidate for deprecation, since the
> original reason for their existence (pulling out the `unsafe` part into
> a helper) is gone..

I tried sending patches for all possible users of those two functions,
but I might have missed some. I would mark them as deprecated once the
patches are applied.

--
Maximiliano