Similarly to deprecating close(), I am now deprecating fclose() and
introduce VIR_FORCE_FCLOSE() and VIR_FCLOSE().
Most of the files are opened in read-only mode, so usage of
VIR_FORCE_CLOSE() seemed appropriate. Others that are opened in write
mode already had the fclose() 0 check and I
Similarly to deprecating close(), I am now deprecating fclose() and
introduce VIR_FORCE_FCLOSE() and VIR_FCLOSE().
Most of the files are opened in read-only mode, so usage of
VIR_FORCE_CLOSE() seemed appropriate. Others that are opened in write
mode already had the fclose() 0 check and I
On 11/12/2010 09:38 AM, Stefan Berger wrote:
Similarly to deprecating close(), I am now deprecating fclose() and
introduce VIR_FORCE_FCLOSE() and VIR_FCLOSE().
Most of the files are opened in read-only mode, so usage of
VIR_FORCE_CLOSE() seemed appropriate. Others that are opened in write
On 11/12/2010 11:58 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 11/12/2010 09:38 AM, Stefan Berger wrote:
Similarly to deprecating close(), I am now deprecating fclose() and
introduce VIR_FORCE_FCLOSE() and VIR_FCLOSE().
Most of the files are opened in read-only mode, so usage of
VIR_FORCE_CLOSE() seemed
On 11/12/2010 10:47 AM, Stefan Berger wrote:
-if (list)
-fclose(list);
-else
-VIR_FORCE_CLOSE(fd);
+VIR_FORCE_FCLOSE(list);
+VIR_FORCE_CLOSE(fd);
You just introduced a double close. list was created via fdopen(fd),
:-( In that case, what about wrapping
