On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:35:22AM -0700, Brad Hall wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:24:29AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hey Brad, > > > > I reviewed this before and still think it looks good. > > > > The one suggestion I had was to add EIO to the efail.c test case, since > > ZFS can return an EIO in situations where it determines that data has > > been corrupted and is unable to recover. (No replica exists) > > > > Based upon our previous conversations, you said that this error code > > currently confuses the test-suite. I still think it's a worthwhile case > > to test. Perhaps you could file a bug to enhance this case to support > > EIO when it's plausible? > > Just added this and updated the webrev. I'm planning to also make another > test-target that does EIO via zinject but that isn't done yet, so I put EIO in > here for now.
I'm a little confused. I thought you had said that sending an EIO from this code would cause bad things to happen in the test harness. Did that turn out not to be the case? > I also changed it so that it sets an env variable PKG=1 when calling pkg, > pkgsend, etc., so that we can differentiate between the test suite and the > actual pkg commands in the library. This should keep it from confusing the > test suite. (seems to, anyhow) Looks good, thanks. -j _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
