From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 16:50:32 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH v11 04/13] bisect--helper: `bisect_clean_state` shell function in C
Message-ID: <xmqq1t245vhj.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFZEwPMdOawVT6W6Ko=xkMLu4PcWkd0s_GiJA-T5uu-oY2m23g@mail.gmail.com>

Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@gmail.com> writes:

> Hey Junio,
>
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>> Also you do not seem to check the error from the function to smudge
>>>> the "result" you are returning from this function.
>>>
>>> Yes I should combine the results from every removal.
>>>
>>>> Isn't unlink_or_warn() more correct helper to use here?
>>>
>>> The shell code uses rm -f which is silent and it removes only if
>>> present.
>>
>> Isn't that what unlink_or_warn() do?  Call unlink() and happily
>> return if unlink() succeeds or errors with ENOENT (i.e. path didn't
>> exist in the first place), but otherwise reports an error (imagine:
>> EPERM).
>
> Umm, I am confused. I tried "rm -f" with a non-existing file and it
> does not show any warning or error.

You are, or you were?  I hope it is the latter, iow, you are no
longer confused and now understand why unlink_or_warn() was
suggested.