Re: [PATCH] config: fix several access(NULL) calls

Matthieu Moy [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

+		if (user_config && access(user_config, R_OK) &&
+		    xdg_config && !access(xdg_config, R_OK))
 			given_config_file = xdg_config;

Shouldn't we be using xdg_config, if user_config is NULL and
xdg_config is defined and accessible?

I don't think so. If user_config is NULL, it means something went wrong,
because $HOME is unset. In this case, I'd rather die than using some
other configuration file silently (which would be possible if
$XDG_CONFIG_HOME is set), and this is what the code does:

		if (user_config && access(user_config, R_OK) &&
		    xdg_config && !access(xdg_config, R_OK))
			given_config_file = xdg_config;
		else if (user_config)
			given_config_file = user_config;
		else
			die("$HOME not set");

Perhaps it could actually be made even clearer with

		if (!user_config)
			die("$HOME not set");
		else if (access(user_config, R_OK) &&
			 xdg_config && !access(xdg_config, R_OK))
			given_config_file = xdg_config;
		else
			given_config_file = user_config;

At least the code needs to break lines at different point and a comment.

	if (user_config &&
		access(user_config, R_OK) &&
                (xdg_config && !access(xdg_config, R_OK)))
                /*
                 * Even if we have usable XDG stuff, we want to
		 * error out on missing HOME!!!
                 */
		use xdg config;
	else if (user_config)
		use user config;
	else
		unusable situation;

But is it really true that we want to error out on missing HOME if
we have usable XDG stuff?