Am 10/14/2012 6:29, schrieb Junio C Hamano: > Johannes Sixt <j.s...@viscovery.net> writes: > >> It might be worth it. We already have a similar special case in >> write_or_die.c:maybe_flush_or_die() for Windows, although it is not about >> a colon in a path name. >> >> Perhaps like this. > > Hrm, the "we already have" one b2f5e26 (Windows: Work around an > oddity when a pipe with no reader is written to., 2007-08-17) was > what you added while I was looking the other way ;-) as a part of > Windows specific pull. > > That change, and this patch, seem to cover the cases to be ignored > with a bit too wide a net to my taste. On other systems, and even > on Windows if the path does not have any colon, EINVAL is something > we would want to noticbbe and report, as a potential problem, no?
For fopen(), EINVAL should occur only if the mode argument is wrong, which it isn't. For fflush() (as in write_or_die.c), EINVAL is not even listed as possible error code. Therefore, catching EINVAL wholesale should not be a problem, IMO, at least not "on other systems". On Windows, it is more problematic because there is a table of "customary" Windows API error codes, which are mapped to errno values, and EINVAL is used for all other Windows error codes (and for a few listed ones), and ignoring EINVAL might indeed miss something worth to be reported. Sooo... I don't mind if you do not pick up this patch because it handles a rather theoretic case, i.e., where a project with strange paths somehow ended up on a Windows drive. But reverting the EINVAL check from write_or_die.c is out of question, because that handles a real case. -- Hannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
