Re: [PATCH] Replace HTTP links with HTTPS ones: Documentation/process

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 19:03 +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 3:06 PM Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > As has been noted elsewhere, checkpatch.pl seems like the appropriate
> > place to make this check.  As for "the entire tree"...if this job gets
> > completed, "git grep" should be a fine way to do that.
> 
> `checkpatch` is not really enforced in many subsystems, no? Further,
> some existing and future HTTP links may support HTTPS later on.
> 
> As for `git grep`, agreed if we reach near 100%. Otherwise, no. In the
> general case, including the code for a task that has some likelihood
> of needing repetition is a safe bet, which is why I suggested it. The
> same script could be also used to check for broken links and related
> maintenance.

scripts/get_maintainer.pl --self-test=links has a reachability test
using wget.

Perhaps a script like that could be used for http:// vs https://

	## Link reachability
	} elsif (($type eq "W" || $type eq "Q" || $type eq "B") &&
		 $value =~ /^https?:/ &&
		 ($self_test eq "" || $self_test =~ /\blinks\b/)) {
	    next if (grep(m@^\Q$value\E$@, @good_links));
	    my $isbad = 0;
	    if (grep(m@^\Q$value\E$@, @bad_links)) {
	        $isbad = 1;
	    } else {
		my $output = `wget --spider -q --no-check-certificate --timeout 10 --tries 1 $value`;
		if ($? == 0) {
		    push(@good_links, $value);
		} else {
		    push(@bad_links, $value);
		    $isbad = 1;
		}
	    }
	    if ($isbad) {
	        print("$x->{file}:$x->{linenr}: warning: possible bad link\t$x->{line}\n");
	    }