(Please keep the ML in CC) On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Nir Soffer <nir...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 1:50 PM, David Herrmann <dh.herrm...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Nir Soffer <nir...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > When udevadm settle times out, it exits with exit code 1. This make it >> > impossible for users to detect a timeout and handle real errors. Now we >> > use exit code 3 on timeouts. >> >> What's the use-case for this? > > > A program running this tool can detect a timeout (expected) or an error > (unexpected), and can change the program flow based on this result. > > Without this, the only way to detect a timeout is to implement the timeout > in the program calling udevadm.
That's an explanation of your patch. > For example, see > https://gerrit.ovirt.org/39740 I cannot really see a use-case here. I mean, yeah, the commit-message says it warns about timeouts but fails loudly on real errors. But again, what's the use-case? Why is a timeout not a real error? Why do you need to handle it differently? Anyway, if it's only about diagnostics this patch seems fine to me. Thanks David _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
