On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:56:03AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:35:22AM -0700, Brad Hall wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:24:29AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Hey Brad, > > > > > > I reviewed this before and still think it looks good. > > > > > > The one suggestion I had was to add EIO to the efail.c test case, since > > > ZFS can return an EIO in situations where it determines that data has > > > been corrupted and is unable to recover. (No replica exists) > > > > > > Based upon our previous conversations, you said that this error code > > > currently confuses the test-suite. I still think it's a worthwhile case > > > to test. Perhaps you could file a bug to enhance this case to support > > > EIO when it's plausible? > > > > Just added this and updated the webrev. I'm planning to also make another > > test-target that does EIO via zinject but that isn't done yet, so I put EIO > > in > > here for now. > > I'm a little confused. I thought you had said that sending an EIO from > this code would cause bad things to happen in the test harness. Did > that turn out not to be the case?
Yeah, that's not the case now: we only [return -1, set errno] when the PKG env variable is set (and it's only set when running pkg commands). Thanks, Brad _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
