On 03/11/10 02:40 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Hey Shawn,
Thanks for taking a look at this.
All of these points seem a bit orthogonal to the original change, but
I'm happy to include them since they seem likely to cause either
tracebacks or other annoying issues.
Yeah, sorry about that. But I figured they should at least be noted. It
doesn't matter to me if they get fixed as part of this or as something else.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:03:42AM -0600, Shawn Walker wrote:
On 03/10/10 03:57 PM, [email protected] wrote:
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~johansen/webrev-15119/
src/modules/client/transport/transport.py:
...
line 419: not related to changeset, but this exception doesn't
exist anymore; just raise
I should be able to delete this exception handler entirely, no? Out of
curiosity, what does the caller of get_catalog1 expect in this situation
now? Should the underlying code continue to treat a 304 as a permanent
failure?
Oh, right, that would work too. At the moment, the conditional
retrieval logic isn't used at all because of the depot catalog rebuild
cases. However, I'd like to revisit that decision and see if we can't
reinstate the conditional retrieval using different logic at least for
some parts.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
