On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Dave Reisner <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 09:28:00PM +0200, Seblu wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Dave Reisner <[email protected]> wrote: >> > --- >> > rc | 7 +++++-- >> > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/rc b/rc >> > index 9abeb52..1e64119 100755 >> > --- a/rc >> > +++ b/rc >> > @@ -11,10 +11,12 @@ e.g: rc list >> > rc help >> > rc start sshd gpm >> > EOF >> > + exit 1 >> > } >> > >> > -(( $# < 1 )) && usage && exit 1 >> > +(( $# < 1 )) && usage >> > >> > +declare -i ret=0 >> > case $1 in >> > help) >> > usage >> > @@ -43,9 +45,10 @@ case $1 in >> > shift >> > for i; do >> > [[ -x "/etc/rc.d/$i" ]] && "/etc/rc.d/$i" $action >> > + (( ret += $? )) >> > done >> > esac >> > >> > -true >> > +exit $ret >> > >> Why return a value which is the sum of error value rather than 1 if >> something fail? The sum is meaningless. >> >> -- >> Sébastien Luttringer >> www.seblu.net > > Well, it's more meaningful than always exiting 0. Perhaps I should have > just done (( ++ret )) here.
you'r right and your patch is meaningfull! My point was just about the sum. ++ret looks more sexy. You patch? -- Sébastien Luttringer www.seblu.net
