Re: [PATCH 1/2] GIT: Try all addresses for given remote name

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: Jul 22, 2005, 21:37 UTC
Message-ID: <20050722213753.GK11916@pasky.ji.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20050722.172629.73295196.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>

Dear diary, on Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 11:26:29PM CEST, I got a letter where "YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@" <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> told me that...

Show 33 quoted lines

> In article <20050722210913.GH11916@pasky.ji.cz> (at Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:09:13 +0200), Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> says:
> 
> > > -}
> > > +#define STR_(s)	# s
> > > +#define STR(s)	STR_(s)
> > 
> > Uh-huh? Why two macros? Well, why any macros at all?
> > 
> :
> > > +	char *colon, *end;
> > > +	char *port = STR(DEFAULT_GIT_PORT);
> > > +	struct addrinfo hints, *ai0, *ai;
> 
> The macro is used here.
> This is trick.
> 
> After preprocess,
> 
> /* --- cut here --- */
> #define TEST 12345
> #define STR_(s) # s
> #define STR(s) STR_(s)
> 
> test(STR(TEST));
> test(STR_(TEST));
> test(# TEST);
> /* --- cut here --- */
> 
> becomes
> 
> test("12345");
> test("TEST");
> test(# 12345);

I see, I didn't know about this. Well, I didn't actually use the # stringificator many times. Perhaps a short comment would be due.

Show 11 quoted lines

> > >  	if (sockfd < 0)
> > >  		die("unable to create socket (%s)", strerror(errno));
> > > -	if (connect(sockfd, (void *)&addr, sizeof(addr)) < 0)
> > > -		die("unable to connect (%s)", strerror(errno));
> :
> > You are saying that you were unable to create socket while you just were
> > unable to connect.  Not any biggie, but it saves the user the trouble of
> > one strace after being confused by an error message. :-)
> 
> In fact, I don't think it is really worng, because it says that
> it could not create (connected) socket or endpoint of connection.

It uses only two words ("create socket") from that, though. ;-)

> Anyway, I agree that it would be confusing.
> Better ideas / wordings?

	if (connect() < 0) sockfd = -2;
	...
	if (sockfd == -1) die("unable to create socket");
	else die("unable to connect")

or I'd prefer the second error message "unable to connect", which is perhaps more descriptive regarding what effectively happened.

BTW, could the close() on the socket ever fail (read as "modify errno") here?

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
If you want the holes in your knowledge showing up try teaching
someone.  -- Alan Cox