From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 14:23:33 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] run-command: simplify wait_or_whine
Message-ID: <CAMP44s3GpZNdpF3j-GSthwx0vY37+yfeVFtnHfPaQgZasJZt7w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87wqqdoqvp.fsf@hexa.v.cablecom.net>

On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch> wrote:
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Nobody is checking for specific error codes; it's the errno that's
>> important.
> [...]
>> -             /*
>> -              * This return value is chosen so that code & 0xff
>> -              * mimics the exit code that a POSIX shell would report for
>> -              * a program that died from this signal.
>> -              */
>> -             code += 128;
>
> Have you checked the callers?  There are lots of callers of
> finish_command(), which returns the value from wait_or_whine()
> unmodified.

Yes I did. Most of them simply check that the number is not zero.

However, that was at the time I wrote the patch, and it seems there's
now one instance where the code is checked.

-- 
Felipe Contreras