Am 01.11.2017 um 15:45 schrieb Simon Ruderich:
> Not checking close(2) can hide errors as not all errors are reported
> during the write(2).
>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Ruderich <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 02:00:11PM +0100, René Scharfe wrote:
>> Most calls are not checked, but that doesn't necessarily mean they need
>> to (or should) stay that way. The Linux man-page of close(2) spends
>> multiple paragraphs recommending to check its return value.. Care to
>> send a follow-up patch?
>
> Hello,
>
> Sure, here is it.
>
> Regards
> Simon
>
> sequencer.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
> index f93b60f61..e0cc2f777 100644
> --- a/sequencer.c
> +++ b/sequencer.c
> @@ -2673,7 +2673,8 @@ static int rewrite_file(const char *path, const char *buf, size_t len)
> return error_errno(_("could not open '%s' for writing"), path);
> if (write_in_full(fd, buf, len) < 0)
> rc = error_errno(_("could not write to '%s'"), path);
> - close(fd);
> + if (close(fd) && !rc)
> + rc = error_errno(_("could not close '%s'"), path);
> return rc;
> }
>
>
Looks good to me, thank you!
René
