On 21/12/10 09:53, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> Some time I needed to add other info, so perror(3) may not be sufficient..
Ah, of course, and you cannot rely on safely snprintf()'ing
something into the string would get passed to perror() because
that could easily change errno if something went wr
On 21/12/10 07:06, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> below is enclosed a trivial patch, which has the aim to
> improve the error reporting of the "btrfs" command.
Any reason to not just use perror() ?
--
Chris Samuel : http://www.csamuel.org/ : Melbourne, VIC
--
To unsubscribe from this list: s
On Monday, 20 December, 2010, you (Chris Samuel) wrote:
> On 21/12/10 07:06, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
>
> > below is enclosed a trivial patch, which has the aim to
> > improve the error reporting of the "btrfs" command.
>
> Any reason to not just use perror() ?
Some time I needed to add other
Hi Chris,
below is enclosed a trivial patch, which has the aim to improve the error
reporting of the "btrfs" command.
You can pull from
http://cassiopea.homelinux.net/git/btrfs-progs-unstable.git
branch
strerror
I changed every printf("some-error") to something like:
