On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 02:16:15PM -0500, John Ferlan wrote:
> ---
> src/rpc/virnetsocket.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/rpc/virnetsocket.c b/src/rpc/virnetsocket.c
> index ef93892..6684eef 100644
> --- a/src/rpc/virnetsocket.c
> +++ b/src/rpc/virnetsocket.c
> @@ -470,7 +470,9 @@ int virNetSocketNewConnectTCP(const char *nodename,
> goto error;
> }
>
> - setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, &opt, sizeof(opt));
> + if (setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, &opt, sizeof(opt)) < 0) {
> + VIR_WARN("Unable to enable port reuse");
> + }
>
> if (connect(fd, runp->ai_addr, runp->ai_addrlen) >= 0)
> break;
Hmm, not sure I agree with this. If this is something that should
not occurr, then we should virReportError. If it is something we
expect to occur, then VIR_WARN will annoy people with irrelevant
messages.
My inclination is to treat it as a fatal error
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list