Am 17.11.2017 um 23:06 schrieb Jeff King: > There's one more case in write_section() that uses "==". That's not > actually wrong, but I wonder if we'd want to make it "< 0" for > consistency. Actually it *is* wrong. -- >8 -- Subject: [PATCH] config: flip return value of write_section() d9bd4cbb9cc (config: flip return value of store_write_*()) made write_section() follow the convention of write(2) to return -1 on error and the number of written bytes on success. 3b48045c6c7 (Merge branch 'sd/branch-copy') changed it back to returning 0 on error and 1 on success, but left its callers still checking for negative values. Let write_section() follow the convention of write(2) again to meet the expectations of its callers. Reported-by: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> --- config.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/config.c b/config.c index 903abf9533..3f079c77ad 100644 --- a/config.c +++ b/config.c @@ -2315,7 +2315,7 @@ static ssize_t write_section(int fd, const char *key) struct strbuf sb = store_create_section(key); ssize_t ret; - ret = write_in_full(fd, sb.buf, sb.len) == sb.len; + ret = write_in_full(fd, sb.buf, sb.len); strbuf_release(&sb); return ret; -- 2.15.0
