feat: Add offline command line option (#1452)

[anthonyharrison]

No description provided.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #1480 (f36945a) into main (d2c1e27) will increase coverage by 1.38%.
The diff coverage is 55.55%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1480      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.44%   83.82%   +1.38%     
==========================================
  Files         279      279              
  Lines        5458     5473      +15     
  Branches      886      888       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits         4500     4588      +88     
+ Misses        767      698      -69     
+ Partials      191      187       -4     

Flag	Coverage Δ
longtests	83.82% <55.55%> (+1.38%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
cve_bin_tool/cvedb.py	85.83% <50.00%> (+3.43%)	⬆️
cve_bin_tool/cli.py	74.07% <56.25%> (+0.67%)	⬆️
cve_bin_tool/extractor.py	65.21% <0.00%> (+1.24%)	⬆️
cve_bin_tool/version_scanner.py	76.19% <0.00%> (+1.36%)	⬆️
cve_bin_tool/checkers/glibc.py	100.00% <0.00%> (+4.16%)	⬆️
test/test_cli.py	93.60% <0.00%> (+10.95%)	⬆️
test/test_scanner.py	74.61% <0.00%> (+12.30%)	⬆️
test/test_json.py	90.00% <0.00%> (+20.00%)	⬆️
... and 1 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d2c1e27...f36945a. Read the comment docs.

[terriko]

This looks great. It makes me wonder if we should be deprecating the two other flags in favour of this one, but I feel like we probably would want to keep them for backwards compatibility even if I suspect most users will just use this instead.

[terriko]

Going to try to re-run CI before merging this, just in case for the 3.10 tests.

[anthonyharrison]

@terriko CI still failing :-( with isort failure.... very strange.

Regarding the options, I think they are still useful particulatrly the check for a new version of the tool. This is where it would be very useful to have some usage stats of how the tool is being used and what options are being specified.

[BreadGenie]

isort failure has been fixed in pypa/setuptools@9c9c91c
Related issue PyCQA/isort#1874

or we could do one of the workarounds if it still doesn't work

[terriko]

other pr caused a conflict. I tried to resolve via web interface, so CI is re-running now.

[terriko]

And yeah, let's get one of the isort workarounds in to CI, probably in a separate PR.

[terriko]

Good news: isort is happy again!