Luke Diamand <luke@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 20:51, Peter Osterlund <peterosterlund2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> In a perforce setup where login is not required, communication fails
>> because p4_check_access does not understand the response from the p4
>> client. Fixed by detecting and ignoring the "info" response.
>
> This is caused by my earlier change in this area. I think this fix
> looks good, thanks.
> Ack.
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Osterlund <peterosterlund2@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> git-p4.py | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/git-p4.py b/git-p4.py
>> index 1998c3e141..3e12774f96 100755
>> --- a/git-p4.py
>> +++ b/git-p4.py
>> @@ -332,6 +332,8 @@ def p4_check_access(min_expiration=1):
>> die_bad_access("p4 error: {0}".format(data))
>> else:
>> die_bad_access("unknown error")
>> + elif code == "info":
>> + return
>> else:
>> die_bad_access("unknown error code {0}".format(code))
>>
>>
>> --
>> Peter Osterlund - peterosterlund2@xxxxxxxxx
>> http://hem.bredband.net/petero2b
The patch was whitespace damaged, but for a two-liner like this, I
can type it myself instead, so no need to resend.
Thanks, both.
