On 07/26/11 16:08, Danek Duvall wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
https://cr.opensolaris.org/action/browse/pkg/swalker/pkg-validate-1-2/webrev/
generic.py:
- line 1137: why not a try/except here? Just not in the fast path?
Basically because it's not a hot path that I cared enough about. I
don't mind changing it for consistency if so desired.
imageplan.py:
- line 2983: Why wedge this into ActionExecutionError? Wouldn't a new
SymlinkLoopError be better? That way we can use it in other parts of
the code that might run into the same problem.
Because the client already handles ActionExecutionErrors gracefully and
I didn't want clients to have to be updated to handle that. Yes, I
could make it a subclass of ActionExecutionErrors, but I also felt like
it wasn't a case that clients actually needed to specifically detect and
handle. It was good enough to simply say what went wrong.
- line 2985: The link needn't target itself; only be part of a loop,
which might be much longer than a single path. (I don't think you need
to add tests for this, but the error text could be broader.)
I've attempted to clarify the error text:
"A link targeting itself or part of a link loop was found at '%s'; a
file or directory was expected. Please remove the link and try again."
- line 2988: will simply removing the link work, or would you have to run
pkg fix first (assuming the path in question isn't supposed to be
changing in this plan)?
That depends on the scenario. If it's supposed to be a file, simply
removing the link should be sufficient since we failed while attempting
to deliver something to the same location. However, if it was a
directory, then yes, pkg fix could potentially be the only correct way
to fix it (after removing it currently).
t_pkg_install.py:
- Does pkg fix properly remove a link targeting itself and replace it
with whatever should be there?
No, because we currently rely on the install path to perform our fixes.
So fix would exit with the same error, but it would restore the item
properly if you removed the bad link first.
Getting fix to be automatically repair it would be neat, but is
definitely non-trivial. I'm uncertain if I should expend that much
effort on this particular case. I can either file a bug for us to
eventually do that, or pass on this for now.
-Shawn
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
