On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:20 AM, Eric Sunshine [off-list ref] wrote:

On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Christian Couder
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

To libify `git apply` functionality we have to signal errors
to the caller instead of die()ing.

As a first step in this direction, let's make apply_patch() return
-1 in case of errors instead of dying. For now its only caller
apply_all_patches() will exit(1) when apply_patch() return -1.

In a later patch, apply_all_patches() will return -1 too instead of
exiting.

Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <redacted>
---

diff --git a/builtin/apply.c b/builtin/apply.c

@@ -4522,6 +4522,14 @@ static int write_out_results(struct apply_state *state, struct patch *list)
 static int apply_patch(struct apply_state *state,
                       int fd,
                       const char *filename,

@@ -4564,7 +4572,7 @@ static int apply_patch(struct apply_state *state,
        }

        if (!list && !skipped_patch)
-               die(_("unrecognized input"));
+               return error(_("unrecognized input"));

        if (state->whitespace_error && (state->ws_error_action == die_on_ws_error))
                state->apply = 0;

@@ -4575,19 +4583,17 @@ static int apply_patch(struct apply_state *state,
                hold_locked_index(state->lock_file, 1);
        }

-       if (state->check_index) {
-               if (read_cache() < 0)
-                       die(_("unable to read index file"));
-       }
+       if (state->check_index && read_cache() < 0)
+               return error(_("unable to read index file"));

        if ((state->check || state->apply) &&
            check_patch_list(state, list) < 0 &&
            !state->apply_with_reject)
-               exit(1);
+               return -1;

        if (state->apply && write_out_results(state, list)) {
                if (state->apply_with_reject)
-                       exit(1);
+                       return -1;
                /* with --3way, we still need to write the index out */
                return 1;
        }

Are these new 'returns' leaking 'list', 'buf', and 'fn_table' which
otherwise get released at the end of the function?

Yeah, you are right, I will fix that. Thanks.