mirror of
https://github.com/moparisthebest/pacman
synced 2024-12-21 23:38:49 -05:00
Avoid logical OR duplication warning from gcc-6
The value EAGAIN is allowed by POSIX to be the same as EWOULDBLOCK, but this is not guaranteed. Thus on some systems (e.g. glibc Linux), we get a warning that the logical OR is being performed on two expressions of the same type. We can not get rid of this test in case any system defines these as unique values. Suggested-by: Dave Reisner Signed-off-by: Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
b012da645e
commit
3729ef7a9a
@ -446,6 +446,16 @@ ssize_t _alpm_files_in_directory(alpm_handle_t *handle, const char *path,
|
||||
return files;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static int should_retry(int errnum)
|
||||
{
|
||||
return errnum == EAGAIN
|
||||
/* EAGAIN may be the same value as EWOULDBLOCK (POSIX.1) - prevent GCC warning */
|
||||
#if EAGAIN != EWOULDBLOCK
|
||||
|| errnum == EWOULDBLOCK
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
|| errnum == EINTR;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static int _alpm_chroot_write_to_child(alpm_handle_t *handle, int fd,
|
||||
char *buf, ssize_t *buf_size, ssize_t buf_limit,
|
||||
_alpm_cb_io out_cb, void *cb_ctx)
|
||||
@ -476,7 +486,7 @@ static int _alpm_chroot_write_to_child(alpm_handle_t *handle, int fd,
|
||||
/* write was successful, remove the written data from the buffer */
|
||||
*buf_size -= nwrite;
|
||||
memmove(buf, buf + nwrite, *buf_size);
|
||||
} else if(errno == EAGAIN || errno == EWOULDBLOCK || errno == EINTR) {
|
||||
} else if(should_retry(errno)) {
|
||||
/* nothing written, try again later */
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
_alpm_log(handle, ALPM_LOG_ERROR,
|
||||
@ -530,7 +540,7 @@ static int _alpm_chroot_read_from_child(alpm_handle_t *handle, int fd,
|
||||
_alpm_chroot_process_output(handle, buf);
|
||||
}
|
||||
return -1;
|
||||
} else if(errno == EAGAIN || errno == EWOULDBLOCK || errno == EINTR) {
|
||||
} else if(should_retry(errno)) {
|
||||
/* nothing read, try again */
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
/* read error */
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user