Re: [PATCH] run-command: simplify wait_or_whine

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Nobody is checking for specific error codes; it's the errno that's
>> important.
> [...]
>> -             /*
>> -              * This return value is chosen so that code & 0xff
>> -              * mimics the exit code that a POSIX shell would report for
>> -              * a program that died from this signal.
>> -              */
>> -             code += 128;
>
> Have you checked the callers?  There are lots of callers of
> finish_command(), which returns the value from wait_or_whine()
> unmodified.

Yes I did. Most of them simply check that the number is not zero.

However, that was at the time I wrote the patch, and it seems there's
now one instance where the code is checked.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]