On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Dave Reisner <d...@falconindy.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 02:11:08PM -0600, Dan McGee wrote:
>> This reduces a lot of code duplication in the write function, which
>> cleans it up a bit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <d...@archlinux.org>
>> ---
>> lib/libalpm/be_local.c | 67
>> ++++++++++++++++--------------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/libalpm/be_local.c b/lib/libalpm/be_local.c
>> index 16c794e..7cce022 100644
>> --- a/lib/libalpm/be_local.c
>> +++ b/lib/libalpm/be_local.c
>> @@ -749,6 +749,22 @@ int _alpm_local_db_prepare(alpm_db_t *db, alpm_pkg_t
>> *info)
>> return retval;
>> }
>>
>> +void write_deps(FILE *fp, const char *header, alpm_list_t *deplist)
>
> static?
Yes, good catch, thanks.
>> +{
>> + alpm_list_t *lp;
>> + if(!deplist) {
>> + return;
>> + }
>> + fputs(header, fp);
>> + fputc('\n', fp);
>> + for(lp = deplist; lp; lp = lp->next) {
>> + char *depstring = alpm_dep_compute_string(lp->data);
>> + fprintf(fp, "%s\n", depstring);
>
> if you're going to use the fputs/fputc combo above for the header, why
> not here as well?
Agreed; I have another patch that converts a number of fprintf() calls
to simpler fputs/fputc calls that don't require %% escaping.
-Dan
