Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <[email protected]> writes:
> All these warning() calls are preceded by a system call. Report the
> actual error to help the user understand why we fail to remove
> something.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <[email protected]>
> ---
> v2 dances with errno
Thanks.
>
> builtin/clean.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/clean.c b/builtin/clean.c
> index d6bc3aaae..3569736f6 100644
> --- a/builtin/clean.c
> +++ b/builtin/clean.c
> @@ -154,6 +154,7 @@ static int remove_dirs(struct strbuf *path, const char
> *prefix, int force_flag,
> struct strbuf quoted = STRBUF_INIT;
> struct dirent *e;
> int res = 0, ret = 0, gone = 1, original_len = path->len, len;
> + int saved_errno;
> struct string_list dels = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP;
>
> *dir_gone = 1;
> @@ -173,9 +174,11 @@ static int remove_dirs(struct strbuf *path, const char
> *prefix, int force_flag,
> if (!dir) {
> /* an empty dir could be removed even if it is unreadble */
> res = dry_run ? 0 : rmdir(path->buf);
> + saved_errno = errno;
> if (res) {
> quote_path_relative(path->buf, prefix, "ed);
I think this part should be more like
res = ... : rmdir(...);
if (res) {
int saved_errno = errno;
... do other things that can touch errno ...
errno = saved_errno;
... now we know what the original error was ...
The reason to store the errno in saved_errno here is not because we
want to help code after "if (res) {...}", but the patch sent as-is
gives that impression and is confusing to the readers.
Perhaps all hunks of this patch share the same issue? I could
locally amend, of course, but I'd like to double check before doing
so myself---perhaps you did it this way for a good reason that I am
missing?
