Hi Ginnie,

Virginia Wray wrote:
> Hi Dave -
>
> I reworked this function as a boolean. I agree with you. It makes more 
> sense to do it this way.
> In doing this, I also found that the return values from 
> td_mount_and_add_swap (in the td_mountall.c file)
> are only checked for a 0 or non-zero value, so I changed them all to 
> -1 if they fail. It looks more symmetrical.
> The different ERR_ return values in lib_td.h need to be evaluated to 
> see if they are necessary.
> The numbering seems random.  I think they may be some legacy code. 
> They are:
>
> #define ERR_OPENING_VFSTAB      46
> #define ERR_ADD_SWAP            47
> #define ERR_MOUNT_FAIL          48
> #define ERR_MUST_MANUAL_FSCK    49
> #define ERR_FSCK_FAILURE        50
> #define ERR_DELETE_SWAP         52
> #define ERR_UMOUNT_FAIL         53
> #define ERR_ZONE_MOUNT_FAIL     65
>
> I thought I would file a bug on the need to evaluate and possibly 
> clean them up.

Comparing definitions above with legacy code, they were directly taken from
old spmi libraries -  I have found that particularly those you have 
mentioned
were pulled from spmicommon_api.h. Looking at the code, these error codes
are being returned (e.g. by td_mount_and_add_swap_from_vfstab()), but 
are not
processed anywhere. I agree this should be cleaned up and consolidated with
rest of the code. Please feel free to file bug for this.

Thank you for pointing this out,
Jan


Reply via email to