On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 03:55:48PM -0400, Laine Stump wrote: > On 10/06/2011 01:36 PM, Guido Günther wrote: > >Hi Eric, > >On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 10:50:46AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > >> > >>These three errors should probably all be changed away from > >>VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR into something more useful, but I'm not sure > >>whether that would be VIR_ERR_CONF_SYNTAX, > >>VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED, or something else. > >I was uncertain about the error codes too, that's why I kept > >VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR as used by other functions in this file. I'd > >opt for VIR_ERR_CONF_SYNTAX. > > We really need to agree on a policy on which code to use for which > type of errors, write it down, then go through the code and correct > everything that's wrong. INTERNAL_ERROR is used *a lot* in XML > parsing where it obviously shouldn't be. Much of it is probably code > written before the CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED, XML_ERROR, and CONF_SYNTAX > codes were added, but I'd wager just as much is due to people > writing new code who look to the existing code for guidelines (I > know I've done this a lot, and continue to be confused about which > code to use in a lot of cases - heck, this is the first I've noticed > CONF_SYNTAX, and I'm not sure when it would be appropriate to use > that vs. XML_ERROR). We're not parsing XML here but xen configuration so CONF_SYNTAX fits better. When parsing XML XML_ERROR makes more sense but you're right that's mostly guessing at the moment. Cheers, -- Guido -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list