On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 09:07:19AM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > 2008/2/15, Victor Lowther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > -[ -f /proc/acpi/ibm/led ] || exit 1 > > I like explicitly returning 1, because you immediately see, that we > return 1 in case we don't find the required resource. (This comment is > true for #13, #11, #9, #7, #6)
However, nothing in pm-utils notices or cares what the hooks return right now. It used to, but the refactoring I performed on run_hooks a couple of patch series ago got rid of that. > > +[ -f /proc/acpi/ibm/led ] || exit > > This is imho harder to read and understand. So I vote against removing > the explicit "exit 1". > > > case "$1" in > > thaw|resume) > > @@ -9,5 +9,3 @@ case "$1" in > > *) > > ;; > > esac > > - > > -exit $? > > Instead of exit $?, I'd say we should return 0 here. So we have a > defined return code of 0, when we have reached the end of the script. Well, this script will exit with 0 by default anyways, so I figured that making it explicitly exit with 0 was redundant. > Cheers, > Michael > -- > Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the > universe are pointed away from Earth? -- Victor Lowther Ubuntu Certified Professional _______________________________________________ Pm-utils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-utils
