Hi Christian On 07/08/18 17:28, Christian Couder wrote: > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:15 PM, Phillip Wood <phillip.w...@talktalk.net> > wrote: >> On 07/08/18 16:25, Christian Couder wrote: >>> >>> I agree about checking the return value from fputs(), but it seems to >>> me that we don't usually check the value of fclose(). >> >> A quick grep shows you're right, there are only a handful of places where >> the return value of fclose() is checked (there aren't many checks for the >> return value of close() either), I'm don't think that is safe though given >> that write errors may only show up when the file gets flushed by closing it. > > I vaguely remember we tried to check those return values but it didn't > work well sometimes. >
I think there's no point in checking the return value after a successful read, or when writing and the file is being closed (and then possibly removed) in some clean-up in an error path, but if the code cares about ensuring the data is written then I think it should be checking the return value, close_tempfile_gently() does for example. In the sequencer code there are some examples where it probably should be checking the return value, and places such as rewrite_file() and write_message() (which uses the lockfile api) where the return code is checked (there are a couple of recently added callers of write_message() in the code to recreate octopus merges that don't check its return value but all the other callers do). Best Wishes Phillip
