Hi! On Jan 3, 2012, at 10:27 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> On second look, I think the way I'm handling some errors may need some If the child dies before it can close, and dup/close was never issued, then I believe the child will be left with a read() that will never be called. > work. I'm not sure perror+exit is the right thing to do on close error, > though I think its pretty unlikely there'd even be an error. Technically, EXIT_SUCCESS and EXIT_FAILURE are all that should be returned via error, but this is often violated (and 127 is also reserved, but no constant was ever defined for it). wait() has some very simple mechanics for determined errors. > Anyway, I think that branch solves the problem in the way you describe. The read issue exists, but otherwise? It certainly will work. Cheers, -Brian
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
