let's not make up new errors in these checks that validate if connect()
work at all. After all, we don't really know if the ENXIO we saw earlier
actually is really caused by the inode being an AF_UNIX socket, we just
have the suspicion...
This way we can implement nice fallbacks later on.
While we are at it, provide a test for this (one that is a bit over the
top, but then again, we can never have enough tests).
With an intentional mistake:
../src/login/logind-dbus.c: In function ‘bus_manager_log_shutdown’:
../src/login/logind-dbus.c:1542:39: error: format ‘%s’ expects a matching ‘char *’ argument [-Werror=format=]
1542 | LOG_MESSAGE("%s %s", message),
| ^~~~~~~
Also break some long lines for more uniform formatting. No functional change.
I went over all log_struct, log_struct_errno, log_unit_struct,
log_unit_struct_errno calls, and they seem fine.
Plain strv_split() should not care if the strings contains backslashes
or quote characters. But extract_first_word() interprets backslashes
unless EXTRACT_RETAIN_ESCAPE is given.
I wonder how it's possible that nobody noticed this before. I think this
code was introduced in 0645b83a40.
Fixup for a5efbf468c: if $COLORTERM was set, we'd
unconditionally turn on colors, which is unexpected and wrong. It even breaks
our own tests when executed in gnome-terminal.
With a recent change paths leaving the statically known lookup paths would be
treated differently then those that remained within those. That was done
(AFAIK) to consistently handle alias names. Unfortunately that means that on
some distributions, especially those where /etc/ consists mostly of symlinks,
would trigger that new detection for every single unit in /etc/systemd/system.
The reason for that is that the units directory itself is already a symlink.
Rebased-by: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@in.waw.pl>
This is a follow-up for f470cb6d13 which in
turn is a follow-up for a068aceafb.
The latter started to honour hidden files when deciding whether a
directory is empty. The former reverted to the old behaviour to fix
issue #23220.
It introduced a bug though: when a directory contains a larger number of
hidden entries the getdents64() buffer will not suffice to read them,
since we just allocate three entries for it (which is definitely enough
if we just ignore the . + .. entries, but not ig we ignore more).
I think it's a bit confusing that dir_is_empty() can return true even if
rmdir() on the dir would return ENOTEMPTY. Hence, let's rework the
function to make it optional whether hidden files are ignored or not.
After all, I looking at the users of this function I am pretty sure in
more cases we want to honour hidden files.
