refact: Fix all shellcheck warnings + formatting

ChrisTitusTech / linutil

Chris Titus Tech's Linux Toolbox - Linutil is a distro-agnostic toolbox designed to simplify everyday Linux tasks.

https://christitus.com

MIT License

2.85k stars 227 forks source link

refact: Fix all shellcheck warnings + formatting #917

Closed jeevithakannan2 closed 3 weeks ago

jeevithakannan2 commented 3 weeks ago

Type of Change

[x] Refactoring

Description

Fixes all the shellcheck warnings and formatting.
@ChrisTitusTech I know this is a lot of file changes 99% of this is just formatting. No one was opening a PR for formatting and the shellcheck warning which causes the shellcheck workflow to fail. If you think you should do this no problem shfmt -i 4 -ci . at root for formatting.

Testing

Tested arch server setup as it has some syntax changes.

Checklist

[x] My code adheres to the coding and style guidelines of the project.
[x] I have performed a self-review of my own code.
[x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
[x] My changes generate no errors/warnings/merge conflicts.

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

@jeevithakannan2 can you please stop spamming useless PRs such as this one?, the maintainer needs a break and he cant be merging every spam PR that you make !!

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

currently you have over 20 pull requests open ! that's ridiculous, not to mention that you had 38 open at one point. Seriously..

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

@ChrisTitusTech what are your opinions on this? i think this is just ridiculous at this point...

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

over 80 files changed all containing useless formatting changes..

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

not to mention that this is highly likely to be untested. no way you ran 80+ scripts.

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

as Chris would say:

"Nuke the world PR, denied."

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

@jeevithakannan2 one question, is this tested? i assume that their is a 5% chance that you ran every script here to test your changes.

Who knows what syntax errors you could have caused in this pr.

jeevithakannan2 commented 3 weeks ago

For your information shmft doesn't casues change that lead to syntax errors

jeevithakannan2 commented 3 weeks ago

If you're that much worried go through the changes

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

yeah, so what i got was that you didnt test your changes and you're currently breaking this repos COC?

jeevithakannan2 commented 3 weeks ago

yeah, so what i got was that you didnt test your changes and you're currently breaking this repos COC?

Not like you

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

yeah, so what i got was that you didnt test your changes and you're currently breaking this repos COC?

Not like you

all of my recent prs have a video attached, or had one attached.

can be confirmed by Adam and other contributors.

all of my PRs are tested as well.

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

Listen, I'm not here trying to argue with you, but if you're going to submit a PR that practically nukes the codebase with unnecessary formatting changes and also is untested, then I will argue with you because this is practically ridiculous.

jeevithakannan2 commented 3 weeks ago

See if you have a problem with too many file changes you can go through them to see if there is anything suspicious. And 99% of them are just formatting with shfmt there is no need for testing this. As for syntax changes arch server setup was tested.

nnyyxxxx commented 3 weeks ago

See if you have a problem with too many file changes you can go through them to see if there is anything suspicious. And 99% of them are just formatting with shfmt there is no need for testing this. As for syntax changes arch server setup was tested.

again you're violating this repos code of conduct.

jeevithakannan2 commented 3 weeks ago

all of my PRs are tested as well.

Fixes one of your untested PR

https://github.com/ChrisTitusTech/linutil/pull/717

adamperkowski commented 3 weeks ago

please test this

adamperkowski commented 3 weeks ago

what even are those changes man? why? i'm sorry but this looks so unnecessary and pointless to me.

adamperkowski commented 3 weeks ago

why are you unquoting a var in one case but quoting the same one in another? why deleting spaces between > and the target? why changing var names? and there's more. it almost looks like you want to artificially pump your line count. i'm sorry but i have to close this. you can redo this PR without all those changes.