On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 16:13 -0400, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> Simo Sorce wrote:
> > From: Simo Sorce <sso...@redhat.com>
> > This is done as a default action of the ancestor class so that no matter
> > what
> > platform is currently used this code is always the same and the name is the
> > wellknown service name.
> > This information will be used by ipacl to stop only and all the services
> > that
> > have been started by any ipa tool/install script
> I think in the start method I'd rather test to see if the file exists
> before trying to open it and do something (logging, return error,
> something) if an exception is hit.
If there is any fatal exception it will be caught in the following open().
> This will help us out of there are permission, disk space or other
> problems writing this file.
Yeah but we get that in the next exception anyway.
> Similarly I wonder if there should be a try/except around updating the file.
I've let them explicitly out of try blocks because I want the method to
fail and report to the caller, would you rather use explict try:/except:
and a then a raise() again ?
> Maybe not a big deal but this patch isn't testable by itself because
> patch 3 contains the spec addition of /var/run/ipa.
True, should I move the spec file change to this patch ?
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York
Freeipa-devel mailing list