On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 07:06:04PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
In an unlikely event of execve() failing, the virCommandExec()
function does not report any error, even though checks that are
at the beginning of the function are verbose when failing.
Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
diff to v1:
- Fixed the test (used virFork() instead of plain fork(),
prolonged the waiting time for child reply, ...)
Good, that was most probably the case. Since the wait occurs only in the failure scenario I have no problem with it being pretty long. It's still just a second and that should do, so I think this is perfect middle ground. If it wasn't in tests I would suggest using poll() instead of actually actively polling, but in this case I think it would only complicate things. ACK.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list