Brad Hall wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 02:58:05PM -0700, Brock Pytlik wrote: > >> Brock Pytlik wrote: >> >>> Is it possible to catch the exception more specifically? I'd feel better >>> catching the ReadError specifically rather than any and all exceptions. >>> >>> Also, one nit, please make the comment "are no files" or "is no file". >>> >>> On a larger scale, I'm not intimately familiar with this code, but I >>> can't figure out why we're retrieving a file by hash when the only >>> action is a depend action. From what I can tell from the action code, >>> dependency actions shouldn't have a hash attribute at all. So I'm >>> confused why we're even touching this code with the examples given. >>> >>> I'm probably just having a brain freeze, but can you help me understand >>> what's going on here? >>> >>> >>> >> Ok, after poking around the code more, wouldn't the easiest thing to do >> be to just check whether hashes (in fetch_files_byhash) or >> content_hashes (in main_func) have a length of at least 1 before trying >> to open the tarfile? Really, can't the entire call to fetch_files_byhash >> be skipped if content_hashes is empty, and wouldn't that fix this >> problem without needing the try catch block at all? >> >> Brock >> > > OK, Brock is right. The new webrev only calls fetch_files_byhash if > content_hashes has a length > 0. > >
This looks good to me. Thanks for getting this in Brad. Brock > Here's the link again: http://cr.opensolaris.org/~bgh/bug-2104/ > > Thanks, > Brad > _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
