Re: [PATCH] am: fix condition check on fseek
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Sep 23, 2024, 16:43 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqcyku48yq.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <7601dcef-e256-4e20-bbd4-75955e5a45d5@app.fastmail.com>
"Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com> writes:
Show 31 quoted lines
> On Sat, Sep 21, 2024, at 17:08, Ruffalo Lavoisier wrote:
>> if fseek() is success, return value is 0
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ruffalo Lavoisier <RuffaloLavoisier@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> builtin/am.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/builtin/am.c b/builtin/am.c
>> index d8875ad402..a7727fd4ea 100644
>> --- a/builtin/am.c
>> +++ b/builtin/am.c
>> @@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ static int is_mail(FILE *fp)
>> regex_t regex;
>> int ret = 1;
>>
>> - if (fseek(fp, 0L, SEEK_SET))
>> + if (!fseek(fp, 0L, SEEK_SET))
>> die_errno(_("fseek failed"));
>>
>> if (regcomp(®ex, header_regex, REG_NOSUB | REG_EXTENDED))
>> --
>> 2.46.1
>
> I don’t get this change? The function returns false on success. true if
> it fails (not zero). You want the program to die if it returns non-zero.
>
> It’s hard to wrap my head around… “false must mean “no errors” ”
>
> If the original code has a bug then I don’t see how git-am(1) could work
> considering it presumably always checks ‘is_mail’.Yeah, the proposed log message states a correct fact, but it is unclear how that justifies the change in the patch part of the message.