Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Do we really have a problem? Or is it something else?
Last night, Gregory tested his fix, and I've build snapshots (r486417)
on x86 linux/win and x86_64 linux and spot checked with apps and such,
and things seem to work.
I'n posting the snapshots now to ~geirm and will send a separate note
for people to evaluate.
Also catching up on mail. I suggested (on the other thread) that we
need to define the return result for undefined properties, answering
NULL seemed reasonable, but now I look at the vmiError enum in vmi.h it
appears that we have already defined:
"VMI_ERROR_NOT_FOUND -- The requested system property was not found"
This surprises me slightly - I would have imagined we would want to work
in a similar way
to the System.getSystem() method and return NULL in the case of a
non-existent property
being requested. However, it appears that GetSystemProperty() is
intended to return
VMI_ERROR_NOT_FOUND in this case.
I would say that since the function behaviour in this case has not yet
been clearly spec'ed
(and we have two VMs that behave differently) we should make a choice
now about which
return is correct and fix up the VMs. So, should we just return a NULL
property value and
no error code, or return VMI_ERROR_NOT_FOUND?
Regards,
Oliver
Regards,
Tim
--
Oliver Deakin
IBM United Kingdom Limited
