Hi Duy,

On Wed, 3 May 2017, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:

> In the first case, we already correctly return -1 if fopen() fails to
> open. But we should report something so people know what's wrong.
> 
> In the second case, config_file == NULL does not necessarily mean "no
> config file". Bail out if needed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>

Again, it seems that your patch series tries to cut at the file boundary,
not at the "logically the same change" boundary, making it a bit more
cumbersome than necessary to follow this patch series.

I highly recommend squashing the first change into the big fopen() ->
fopen_or_warn() patch I hinted at earlier, and let the second change (with
the accompanying test case) stand on its own.

Ciao,
Dscho