Three copies, one bug, and the correct reasoning already written down in
a comment three functions above the code that needed it. That is an
argument about review rather than about duplication, and it is more
persuasive than any of the similarity percentages above it.
`OpenOptions::mode` applies only when the file is created, so opening one
that already exists keeps whatever mode it had. For `append_file` that is
the normal case rather than the odd one -- every write to a transcript
after the first -- and for `create_file` it happens on every rewrite. A
file made wrong by an older version or by hand would have stayed
world-readable for as long as it was only ever appended to.
This is the same reasoning as `create_dir`'s second call, which was
already here and already commented. Missing it on the file paths was the
kind of gap that only shows when the two are read side by side, which is
an argument for this crate existing rather than against it.
Set through the open handle rather than the path, so nothing can swap
what is at that path between the open and the chmod.
Caught by ai-app's session reviewing the module I had taken from their
code, which is the review this repo is supposed to make possible.
dev-updater serves APKs to a phone and ai-app runs model sessions for
one. Above the waterline they share nothing. Underneath they are the
same program: bound to wg0 so they are not on the LAN, presenting a
certificate from a CA the app pins, answering only requests carrying a
token enrolled by scanning a QR off the terminal, keeping state in
owner-only files outside the repo.
Three modules, each extracted only after diffing the two copies and
finding nothing between them but a product name and a type parameter.
netif fails closed when the tunnel is down. enroll generates, stores and
compares the token, and prints the QR, with the URI scheme as the one
per-project part. private owns the file modes, taken from ai-app's
version because it had already factored out what dev-updater still has
inline in two places.
Nothing is removed from either project. This is a proposal with a
working core, and the README carries the measured evidence -- the
enrollment scanner activity differs by its package line and nothing
else, the RON format module is byte-identical, and the two copies have
each drifted into holding an improvement the other lacks, which is the
cost being paid today.
iris