Re: [PATCH] builtin-apply: Show a more descriptive error on failure when opening a patch
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Apr 13, 2008, 19:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vtzi5bkdz.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <1208112991-21598-1-git-send-email-albertito@gmail.com>
Alberto Bertogli <albertito@gmail.com> writes:
Show 25 quoted lines
> When a patch can't be opened (it doesn't exist, there are permission
> problems, etc.) we get the usage text, which is not a proper indication of
> failure.
>
> This patch fixes that by simply doing a perror() instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alberto Bertogli <albertito@gmail.com>
> ---
> builtin-apply.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin-apply.c b/builtin-apply.c
> index abe73a0..d80b231 100644
> --- a/builtin-apply.c
> +++ b/builtin-apply.c
> @@ -3120,8 +3120,11 @@ int cmd_apply(int argc, const char **argv, const char *unused_prefix)
> arg = prefix_filename(prefix, prefix_length, arg);
>
> fd = open(arg, O_RDONLY);
> - if (fd < 0)
> - usage(apply_usage);
> + if (fd < 0) {
> + perror("Error opening patch");
> + return 1;
> + }This makes sense, but I wonder if we want to parrot "arg" back. The problem could be that the command and the user are disagreeing which parameter on the command line is the name of the patch file...
Show 6 quoted lines
> + > read_stdin = 0; > set_default_whitespace_mode(whitespace_option); > errs |= apply_patch(fd, arg, inaccurate_eof); > -- > 1.5.5.104.ge4331