On 8/16/2017 8:40 AM, Christian Couder wrote:
In handshake_capabilities() we use warning() when a capability
is not supported, so the exit code of the function is 0 and no
further error is shown. This is a problem because the warning
message doesn't tell us which subprocess cmd failed.
On the contrary if we cannot write a packet from this function,
we use error() and then subprocess_start() outputs:
initialization for subprocess '<cmd>' failed
so we can know which subprocess cmd failed.
Let's improve the warning() message, so that we can know which
subprocess cmd failed.
Helped-by: Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Change since previous version:
- Use process->argv[0] instead of adding a new parameter to
handshake_capabilities(), thanks to Lars.
sub-process.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sub-process.c b/sub-process.c
index 6edb97c1c6..6ccfaaba99 100644
--- a/sub-process.c
+++ b/sub-process.c
@@ -184,8 +184,8 @@ static int handshake_capabilities(struct child_process *process,
if (supported_capabilities)
*supported_capabilities |= capabilities[i].flag;
} else {
- warning("external filter requested unsupported filter capability '%s'",
- p);
+ warning("subprocess '%s' requested unsupported capability '%s'",
+ process->argv[0], p);
}
}
This one is even cleaner. Thanks Lars for pointing out the fact we
already had the cmd name. Looks good.
