On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:40:48 -0500 Anurag Maskey <Anurag.Maskey at Sun.COM> wrote:
> > >>>>>> http://zhadum.east/export/ws/am223141/checkout-area/nwam1-fixes/webrev/ [...] > > ncu_ip.c:1013,1032 Even if we get to 1013 isn't 1032 still going to fail? > > > No. line 1013 has found the ifname with lifnum and then 1032 gets the > flags for that interface. any reason it would fail? Doesn't the only way that (new line numbers) 1024 get executed is if the address has been removed. Then 1038 would fail? > > > >> I did not do anything with the failures yet. It is a separate issue and > >> I don't want to deal with it here. > >> > > > > Separate that out into a separate RFE. I've written that code before > > and will do it again if it proves worthwhile. > > > I did. It's bug 13706 > http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=13706 I've taken this. Michael > > Anurag >
