On 03/24/2010 01:50 PM, Dave Shield wrote: > On 24 March 2010 11:10, Jan Safranek<[email protected]> wrote: >> In trunk I've made following change to fix a bug: >> >> It adds new negative return value to netsnmp_parse_args and >> snmp_parse_args, which should be handled by callers (=applications). > > What is the intended interpretation of these three return values? > > -1 seems to indicate an invalid or unrecognised option value > -2 seems to indicate that processing has been completed > > What is the distinctive circumstances for a return value of -3?
that usage() should not be printed - at least that's why -2 was returned when there were problems with Ku generation. Jan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
