Error if both lsb_release n os_release are missing

[ukanga]

Fixes #430

[ygerlach]

This change is probably fine, but it introduces a time-of-check-time-of-use bug.

My suggestion would be to replace file_read in read_info_file with something like this:

try{
	GLib.FileUtils.get_contents(file_path, out dist_file_cont);
}
catch (Error e) {
	return null;
}

This should remove all logging, but avoid the time-of-check-time-of-use problem.

[mtwebster]

What version are you using? Is this necessary since 76bd8ee?

[ukanga]

This change is probably fine, but it introduces a time-of-check-time-of-use bug.

My suggestion would be to replace file_read in read_info_file with something like this:

try{
	GLib.FileUtils.get_contents(file_path, out dist_file_cont);
}
catch (Error e) {
	return null;
}

This should remove all logging, but avoid the time-of-check-time-of-use problem.

Yes, let's not introduce bugs. Let me make the change shortly.

[ukanga]

What version are you using? Is this necessary since 76bd8ee?

I on Arch Linux using extra/timeshift 25.07.4-1.

I would expect it to still be the case since the function is still present and other functions still call it.

[Anagastes]

Just a quick note: Under EndeavourOS, it is now a symlink. And a different name. So I have the same error. :)

ls -halFs /etc/*-release 
4,0K lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 16. Aug 2022  /etc/os-release -> ../usr/lib/os-release

[ygerlach]

Just a quick note: Under EndeavourOS, it is now a symlink. And a different name. So I have the same error. :)

What different name? timeshift checks /etc/os-release or /etc/lsb-release what ever is present. And it should follow symlinks. Maybe you get an error, because one of the two files where missing, but it still works?

But having the info that some distros put the files at a different folder is good. I guess timeshift should check /usr/lib/os-release at some point too.

[Anagastes]

Just a quick note: Under EndeavourOS, it is now a symlink. And a different name. So I have the same error. :)

What different name? timeshift checks /etc/os-release or /etc/lsb-release what ever is present. And it should follow symlinks. Maybe you get an error, because one of the two files where missing, but it still works?

But having the info that some distros put the files at a different folder is good. I guess timeshift should check /usr/lib/os-release at some point too.

Sorry, bad wording.. I mean primary the symlink to /usr/lib/