0.2.0 (current) Thoroughness: Medium Understanding: Medium
by Minoru on 2021-05-01
This review is from Crev, a distributed system for code reviews. To add your review, set up cargo-crev
.
0.2.0 (current) Thoroughness: Medium Understanding: Medium
by Minoru on 2021-05-01
These reviews are from cargo-vet. To add your review, set up cargo-vet
and submit your URL to its registry.
0.2.0 (current)
From kornelski/crev-proofs copy of salsa.debian.org.
Packaged for Debian (stable). Changelog:
0.2.0 (current)
From kornelski/crev-proofs copy of git.savannah.gnu.org.
Packaged for Guix (crates-io)
cargo-vet does not verify reviewers' identity. You have to fully trust the source the audits are from.
May have been packaged automatically without a review
This crate can be compiled, run, and tested on a local workstation or in controlled automation without surprising consequences. More…
Crates in the crates.io registry are tarball snapshots uploaded by crates' publishers. The registry is not using crates' git repositories. There is absolutely no guarantee that the repository URL declared by the crate belongs to the crate, or that the code in the repository is the code inside the published tarball.
To review the actual code of the crate, it's best to use cargo crev open wait-timeout
. Alternatively, you can download the tarball of wait-timeout v0.2.0 or view the source online.
The crate implements a seemingly trivial thing: waiting for a child process to finish, with a timeout.
On Windows, this boils down to a single WinAPI call. I don't know much about Windows, but the code looks okay to me. There is a minor issue of timeouts being capped at ≈49 days, which I reported: https://github.com/alexcrichton/wait-timeout/issues/23
On Unix, the algorithm is much more involved. I understand it, and I believe it to be correct.
The crate calls into libc and WinAPI, so there are a bit of
unsafe
in here. But it all looks all right to me.