From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@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 2E10072A22
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 12:46:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2514710970
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 12:46:15 +0200 (CEST)
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 id 91F4C10962
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 12:46:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 65B0F42E61
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 12:46:14 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <a6a706b8-b6e2-59f9-27df-512cc1c7f6a9@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 12:46:08 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:90.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/90.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Lorenz Stechauner <l.stechauner@proxmox.com>
References: <20210616093604.33668-1-l.stechauner@proxmox.com>
 <20210616093604.33668-3-l.stechauner@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210616093604.33668-3-l.stechauner@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.883 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 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
 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [tools.pm]
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH v9 common 2/2] tools:
 download_file_from_url: move check for existing file outside eval
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 10:46:45 -0000

On 16.06.21 11:35, Lorenz Stechauner wrote:
> it is not necessary to include this block in the eval which when it
> fails tries to unlink $tmpdest, because in the check for the existing
> file $tmpdest is not used.
> ---
>  src/PVE/Tools.pm | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 


applied, thanks! FYI I made a not directly related followup (send to the list).