Re: [PATCH v6 02/39] api-lockfile: revise and expand the documentation

From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Oct 1, 2014, 08:11 UTC
Message-ID: <542BB738.9080100@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqoatxrodx.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

On 09/30/2014 07:47 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 03:41:55PM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
>>
>>> I didn't fix it because IMO the correct fix is to add a stdio-oriented
>>> entry point to the lockfile API, and teach the lockfile code to handle
>>> closing the FILE correctly when necessary.
>>
>> I think so, too, after our discussion[1] surrounding 9540ce5 (refs: write
>> packed_refs file using stdio, 2014-09-10).
> 
> Yeah, but we already write packed-refs via stdio, so the stdio
> oriented lockfile API entry points can no longer be just on the
> mythical todo list but needs to become reality before we can merge
> this topic sanely.

That's not the fault of this topic, which just moves the text of the "rule" to a different place in the file. And neither is it the fault of Peff's change to write packed-refs via stdio. It is the fault of

  60b9004 Use atomic updates to the fast-import mark file (2007-03-08)

which also fdopen()ed then fclose()d a lock_file::fd, and of

  0c0478c Document lockfile API (2008-01-16)

which documented the "rule" that had already been broken.

Show 6 quoted lines

>>> But I didn't want to add even more changes to this patch series, so I am
>>> working on this as a separate patch series. I hope to submit it soon.
>>
>> Yay.
> 
> Yay.

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@alum.mit.edu