Signed-off-by: Sun He <redacted>
---
As tmpname is used without initialization, it should be a mistake.
builtin/pack-objects.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/builtin/pack-objects.c b/builtin/pack-objects.c
index c733379..4922ce5 100644
--- a/builtin/pack-objects.c
+++ b/builtin/pack-objects.c
@@ -823,7 +823,7 @@ static void write_pack_file(void)
utb.modtime = --last_mtime;
if (utime(pack_tmp_name, &utb) < 0)
warning("failed utime() on %s: %s",
- tmpname, strerror(errno));
+ pack_tmp_name, strerror(errno));
}
/* Enough space for "-<sha-1>.pack"? */--
1.9.0.138.g2de3478.dirty
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Sun He [off-list ref] wrote:
Subject: Replace tmpname with pack_tmp_name in warning. The developer mistook tmpname for pack_tmp_name.
The subject should be a short summary of the change, and the rest of
the commit message before the "---" line provides extra detail
explaining the change.
Signed-off-by: Sun He <redacted>
---
As tmpname is used without initialization, it should be a mistake.
This is valid information for the commit message above the "---" line.
So, your full commit message might say something like this:
Subject: write_pack_file: use correct variable in diagnostic
'pack_tmp_name' is the subject of the utime() check, so report
it in the warning, not the uninitialized 'tmpname'.
quoted hunk
builtin/pack-objects.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/builtin/pack-objects.c b/builtin/pack-objects.c
index c733379..4922ce5 100644
--- a/builtin/pack-objects.c
+++ b/builtin/pack-objects.c
@@ -823,7 +823,7 @@ static void write_pack_file(void)
utb.modtime = --last_mtime;
if (utime(pack_tmp_name, &utb) < 0)
warning("failed utime() on %s: %s",
- tmpname, strerror(errno));
+ pack_tmp_name, strerror(errno));
}
/* Enough space for "-<sha-1>.pack"? */
--1.9.0.138.g2de3478.dirty
2014-03-02 11:59 GMT+08:00 Eric Sunshine [off-list ref]:
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Sun He [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Subject: Replace tmpname with pack_tmp_name in warning. The developer mistook tmpname for pack_tmp_name.
The subject should be a short summary of the change, and the rest of
the commit message before the "---" line provides extra detail
explaining the change.
OK, got it.
Thank you very much.
quoted
Signed-off-by: Sun He <redacted>
---
As tmpname is used without initialization, it should be a mistake.
This is valid information for the commit message above the "---" line.
So, your full commit message might say something like this:
Subject: write_pack_file: use correct variable in diagnostic
'pack_tmp_name' is the subject of the utime() check, so report
it in the warning, not the uninitialized 'tmpname'.
Thank you for your suggestion, I will modify it right now. :-)
quoted
builtin/pack-objects.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/builtin/pack-objects.c b/builtin/pack-objects.c
index c733379..4922ce5 100644
--- a/builtin/pack-objects.c
+++ b/builtin/pack-objects.c
@@ -823,7 +823,7 @@ static void write_pack_file(void)
utb.modtime = --last_mtime;
if (utime(pack_tmp_name, &utb) < 0)
warning("failed utime() on %s: %s",
- tmpname, strerror(errno));
+ pack_tmp_name, strerror(errno));
}
/* Enough space for "-<sha-1>.pack"? */
--1.9.0.138.g2de3478.dirty