From: "Ben Collins-Sussman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 10:31 AM
> "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > I agree. I'm thinking of rewriting it to leave files behind. I > > > suspect the routine could return either APR_SUCCESS (if nothing but > > > was left behind), or some not-yet-invented error code that > > > specifically means it wasn't able to remove everything. > > > > should simply return the error that the _remove returned, so if there is > > an error, there was some reason it wasn't completed. But it still completes > > all that it is allowed. > > What if 3 different files in the tree (scattered about) are > un-removable for different reasons? This function still removes > everything else and finishes its recursion. Which of the three status > codes should it return? The first it encountered. Here's the scenario... path/to/some/where/file If we remove 'some', and fail at file due to EACCESS, we will fail at 'where' as well since it contains files, and at 'some' since it contains a directory. We don't care that we failed because files remain, we care why that file remains in the first place. Bill
