On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 01:01:03PM +0100, Joel Granados wrote: > > merely queries the code for the appropriate partition table type > > and always returns a non-negative number. > > well. The specific code in each label might return a negative number > for error as well. Think of some spec that defines that maximum number > as something that might be read from disk (just playing the devils > advocate here). The read from disk might fail and then it must be able > to tell the calling function that something when wrong. > > > > > > when it encounters an error. All possitive numbers can be valide to > > > express max_number_of_supported_partitions. Including 0. So a negative > > > number would seem natural for me to use in this case. > > > > > > 0: means that the label does no support partitions. > > > <0: means the number of partitions > > > >0: means something nasty has ocurred.
AFAIK kernel has similar function that returns 1 if the device can not be partitioned (maximum of one partition on a device does not make sense anyway). So 0 could be used to indicate an error. But this would be incosistent with the rest of functions that return -1 in case of error and thus it might make things worse. Just my two cents ;) -- Best regards / s pozdravem Petr Uzel, Packages maintainer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s.r.o. e-mail: [email protected] Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 964 190 00 Prague 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz _______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
