On 22/06/16 13:18, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 06/22/2016 01:00 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> How about the attached instead?
>
> That's a sensible solution.
>
>> diff --git a/lib/fts.c b/lib/fts.c
>> index bcdcff9..d022633 100644
>> --- a/lib/fts.c
>> +++ b/lib/fts.c
>> @@ -1461,9 +1461,15 @@ fts_build (register FTS *sp, int type)
>> while (cur->fts_dirp) {
>> bool is_dir;
>> size_t d_namelen;
>> + __set_errno (0);
>> struct dirent *dp = readdir(cur->fts_dirp);
>> - if (dp == NULL)
>> + if (dp == NULL) {
>> + if (errno) {
>> + cur->fts_errno = errno;
>> + cur->fts_info = items ? FTS_ERR : FTS_DNR;
>
> s/items/nitems/
>
>> + }
>> break;
>> + }
>> if (!ISSET(FTS_SEEDOT) && ISDOT(dp->d_name))
>> continue;
>>
>> @@ -1622,7 +1628,7 @@ mem1: saved_errno = errno;
>>
>> /* If didn't find anything, return NULL. */
>> if (!nitems) {
>> - if (type == BREAD)
>> + if (type == BREAD && cur->fts_info != FTS_DNR)
>> cur->fts_info = FTS_DP;
>> fts_lfree(head);
>> return (NULL);
>
> Other than the above typo, this looks good to me, thanks!
> Unfortunately, it seems we don't have test for fts.c, do we?
Not that I know of.
For effective testing of this you'd have to use something like cmocka,
or more generically something like CharybdeFS
cheers,
Pádraig
