This seem to be a very common pattern in the current code.
The function prints a generic removal failure message, the file name
which failed and readable errno presentation. The function preserves
errno and always returns the value unlink(2) returned, but prints
no message for ENOENT, as it was the most often filtered out in the
code calling unlink. Besides, removing a file is anyway the purpose of
calling unlink.
Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The AIX mkstemp() modifies its template parameter to an empty string if
the call fails. The existing code had already recomputed the template,
but too late to be good.
See also 6ff6af62, which fixed this problem in a different spot.
Signed-off-by: Mike Ralphson <mike@abacus.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In a repository created with git older than f49fb35 (git-init-db: create
"pack" subdirectory under objects, 2005-06-27), objects/pack/ directory is
not created upon initialization. It was Ok because subdirectories are
created as needed inside directories init-db creates, and back then,
packfiles were recent invention.
After the said commit, new codepaths started relying on the presense of
objects/pack/ directory in the repository. This was exacerbated with
8b4eb6b (Do not perform cross-directory renames when creating packs,
2008-09-22) that moved the location temporary pack files are created from
objects/ directory to objects/pack/ directory, because moving temporary to
the final location was done carefully with lazy leading directory creation.
Many packfile related operations in such an old repository can fail
mysteriously because of this.
This commit introduces two helper functions to make things work better.
- odb_mkstemp() is a specialized version of mkstemp() to refactor the
code and teach it to create leading directories as needed;
- odb_pack_keep() refactors the code to create a ".keep" file while
create leading directories as needed.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
R. Tyler Ballance reported a mysterious transient repository corruption;
after much digging, it turns out that we were not catching and reporting
memory allocation errors from some calls we make to zlib.
This one _just_ wraps things; it doesn't do the "retry on low memory
error" part, at least not yet. It is an independent issue from the
reporting. Some of the errors are expected and passed back to the caller,
but we die when zlib reports it failed to allocate memory for now.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A few compat/* layer functions call these functions, but we would really
want to keep them thin, without depending too much on the libgit proper.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
So I was looking at the disgusting size of the git binary, and even with
the debugging removed, and using -Os instead of -O2, the size of the text
section was pretty high. In this day and age I guess almost a megabyte of
text isn't really all that surprising, but it still doesn't exactly make
me think "lean and mean".
With -Os, a surprising amount of text space is wasted on inline functions
that end up just being replicated multiple times, and where performance
really isn't a valid reason to inline them. In particular, the trivial
wrapper functions like "xmalloc()" are used _everywhere_, and making them
inline just duplicates the text (and the string we use to 'die()' on
failure) unnecessarily.
So this just moves them into a "wrapper.c" file, getting rid of a tiny bit
of unnecessary bloat. The following numbers are both with "CFLAGS=-Os":
Before:
[torvalds@woody git]$ size git
text data bss dec hex filename
700460 15160 292184 1007804 f60bc git
After:
[torvalds@woody git]$ size git
text data bss dec hex filename
670540 15160 292184 977884 eebdc git
so it saves almost 30k of text-space (it actually saves more than that
with the default -O2, but I don't think that's necessarily a very relevant
number from a "try to shrink git" standpoint).
It might conceivably have a performance impact, but none of this should be
_that_ performance critical. The real cost is not generally in the wrapper
anyway, but in the code it wraps (ie the cost of "xread()" is all in the
read itself, not in the trivial wrapping of it).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Alex Riesen
Junio C Hamano
Mike Ralphson
Linus Torvalds