From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 38FD96CE2F for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 07:21:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2E7B815F93 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 07:21:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (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 id AE44315F89 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 07:21:45 +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 729CE4615F for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 07:21:45 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <9dad6182-b885-24ee-0559-e28cf66d7eba@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 07:21:39 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:86.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/86.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Aaron Lauterer References: <20210201142131.30024-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> <20210201142131.30024-8-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> <7f0b50fd-2620-226f-8341-ca21b7bdd45c@proxmox.com> <88f63c1f-c303-85d2-e798-56cccf561e1d@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <88f63c1f-c303-85d2-e798-56cccf561e1d@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.025 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.178 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager 7/7] ui: qemu/HardwareView: add CDROM permission check to edit button X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2021 06:21:46 -0000 On 02.02.21 14:41, Aaron Lauterer wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 2/2/21 2:13 PM, Dominik Csapak wrote: >> well this is hardly readable anymore... (not your fault) >> but, would it now not be disabled if i have no CDROM perms >> even if it is a disk and i have perms for that, >> because of short-circuiting ? >=20 > Oh yeah, thanks for catching that. One more comment inline >=20 >=20 >> >> On 2/1/21 3:21 PM, Aaron Lauterer wrote: >>> Add CDROM permission check to disable the Edit button if they are not= >>> present. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Aaron Lauterer >>> --- >>> =C2=A0 www/manager6/qemu/HardwareView.js | 6 +++++- >>> =C2=A0 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/www/manager6/qemu/HardwareView.js b/www/manager6/qemu/Ha= rdwareView.js >>> index 252a8e72..56bdc0a1 100644 >>> --- a/www/manager6/qemu/HardwareView.js >>> +++ b/www/manager6/qemu/HardwareView.js >>> @@ -600,7 +600,11 @@ Ext.define('PVE.qemu.HardwareView', { >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 remove_btn.set= Text(isUsedDisk && !isCloudInit ? remove_btn.altText : remove_btn.default= Text); >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 remove_btn.RES= TMethod =3D isUnusedDisk ? 'POST':'PUT'; >>> -=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 edit_btn.setDisabled(rec.= data.delete || !rowdef.editor || isCloudInit || (!isCDRom && !diskCap)); >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 edit_btn.setDisabled(rec.= data.delete || >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 !rowdef.editor || >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 isCloudInit || >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 !caps.vms['VM.Config.CDROM'] || >=20 > It doesn't really help readability but should work if we additionally c= heck if the current selection is a cdrom. This should prevent short-circu= iting in that case >=20 > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 (isC= DRom && !caps.vms['VM.Config.CDROM'])) || please also split all lines consistently, i.e., if this would stay as is = then it should be written as edit_btn.setDisabled( rec.data.delete || !rowdef.editor || isCloudInit || !caps.vms['VM.Config.CDROM'] || (!isCDRom && !diskCap) ); less indentation but also less crowded (as method call and first argument= aren't glued together)