Alberto Bertogli <albertito@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> When a patch can't be opened (it doesn't exist, there are permission
> problems, etc.) we get the usage text, which is not a proper indication of
> failure.
>
> This patch fixes that by simply doing a perror() instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alberto Bertogli <albertito@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> builtin-apply.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin-apply.c b/builtin-apply.c
> index abe73a0..d80b231 100644
> --- a/builtin-apply.c
> +++ b/builtin-apply.c
> @@ -3120,8 +3120,11 @@ int cmd_apply(int argc, const char **argv, const char *unused_prefix)
> arg = prefix_filename(prefix, prefix_length, arg);
>
> fd = open(arg, O_RDONLY);
> - if (fd < 0)
> - usage(apply_usage);
> + if (fd < 0) {
> + perror("Error opening patch");
> + return 1;
> + }
This makes sense, but I wonder if we want to parrot "arg" back. The
problem could be that the command and the user are disagreeing which
parameter on the command line is the name of the patch file...
> +
> read_stdin = 0;
> set_default_whitespace_mode(whitespace_option);
> errs |= apply_patch(fd, arg, inaccurate_eof);
> --
> 1.5.5.104.ge4331
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
