tooling srctl: add GUI editor support and improve output spacing

[Daniel-Giszpenc]

Issue:
GUI editors like VS Code open in a new, separate process, so calling programs need GUI editors to be launched with a wait flag to know when the user has finished editing and closed the tab to act on the file. Terminal editors (nano, vim, vi) run directly inside the terminal session, so calling programs automatically wait for the editor process to finish and then act.

Previously there was no handling for an additional arg in the $EDITOR env-var value.

Also, the error and program output would start on the input line and be more difficult to read.

Solutions:

1. Check if the editor var has a flag and if that are is --wait or -w in which case adjust the exec Cmd to move the flag into the command arguements.
2. Add a new-line after the input string. Using \n instead of Println to preserve formatted string print.

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: Daniel-Giszpenc / name: NeoStudyHat (bfc0660, d52c63d)

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @Daniel-Giszpenc!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/sig-security 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/sig-security has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @Daniel-Giszpenc. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work.

Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[mtardy]

from memory I think we don't want that because in some situation it messes up the display, let me take a look

[Daniel-Giszpenc]

@mtardy Do you want some help looking into this or me to just cut from the PR as the main feature here is GUI editor support?

[tabbysable]

/label tide/merge-method-squash
/ok-to-test
/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Daniel-Giszpenc, tabbysable

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• sig-security-tooling/OWNERS [tabbysable]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[mtardy]

Thanksk!! I'll drop the other fix and and focus on the GUI thing you wanted to fix initially in this PR.

[mtardy]

Maybe you want something like that so that we pass any args provided by the user in the env variables?

Suggested change

	// #nosec G204
	// caution: the binary starts whatever EDITOR is provided by user.
	cmd := exec.Command(editor, tmpFile.Name())
	editorFields := strings.Fields(editor)
	isGuiEditor := len(editorFields) == 2 && (editorFields[1] == "--wait" || editorFields[1] == "-w")
	if isGuiEditor {
	cmd = exec.Command(editorFields[0], editorFields[1], tmpFile.Name())
	}
	editorFields := strings.Fields(editor)
	if len(editorFields) == 0 {
	return nil, fmt.Errorf("editor is empty")
	}
	args := append(editorFields[1:], tmpFile.Name())
	// #nosec G204
	// caution: the binary starts whatever EDITOR is provided by user.
	cmd := exec.Command(editorFields[0], args...)

[Daniel-Giszpenc]

I don't think the len 0 check is needed because we have an earlier check for if the EDITOR var is set previously.

I like the visual neatness and flexibility of how you pass the args am not sure if I prefer it over my way because if you look at how all the popular gui editors approach the wait argument, it's one additional argument that is always -w or --wait. My way supports stricter checking of the providing user input to make sure it is valid here. We may prefer the flexibility of a personal tool like this having looser checks here though so I am curious what you think. I am not sure what other arguments a user may want to use here and I know a gui editor will require -w or --wait so there should be some kind of error or warning for not having that with over 0 arguments set.

What do you think?