On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 09:20:07AM -0400, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 13:58 +0200, Karel Zak wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 12:11:17AM -0400, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > > @@ -800,14 +857,23 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> > > if (what == ACT_ADD || what == ACT_DELETE) {
> > > struct stat x;
> > >
> > > - if (stat(wholedisk, &x) || !S_ISBLK(x.st_mode))
> > > - errx(EXIT_FAILURE, _("%s: not a block device"), wholedisk);
> > > + if (stat(wholedisk, &x) || !S_ISBLK(x.st_mode)) {
> >
> > && S_ISREG() :-)
> >
> > > + /* not a blkdev, try to associate it to a loop device */
> >
> > if (what == ACT_DELETE)
> > errx(EXIT_FAILURE, _("%s: cannot delete partitions"), wholedisk);
> >
> > > + if (!loopmod_supports_parts())
> > > + errx(EXIT_FAILURE, _("%s: does not support loop device partitions"),
> > > + wholedisk);
> > > + assoc_loopdev(wholedisk);
> > > + wholedisk = xstrdup(lc.device);
> > > + }
> > > }
> > > if ((fd = open(wholedisk, O_RDONLY)) == -1)
> > > err(EXIT_FAILURE, _("%s: open failed"), wholedisk);
> > >
> > > - if (what == ACT_DELETE)
> > > + if (what == ACT_DELETE) {
> > > + if (loopdev)
> > > + errx(EXIT_FAILURE, _("%s: cannot delete partitions"), wholedisk);
> > > rc = del_parts(fd, wholedisk, disk_devno, lower, upper);
> > > + }
> >
> > Does it make sense to initialize loop device if ACT_DELETE is requested?
>
> Ah, yes, good catch. Below is the corrected patch, do you think this
> feature could go into 2.20?
2.21, for 2.20 is too late
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
