Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote: > On 10/04/2011 01:35 PM, Juan Quintela wrote: >> Anthony Liguori<anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote: >>> On 09/23/2011 07:50 AM, Juan Quintela wrote: >>>> make functions propaget errno, instead of just using -EIO. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela<quint...@redhat.com> >>> >>> qemu_file_has_error() implies a boolean response. Wouldn't >>> qemu_file_get_error() make more sense if you're going to rely on the >>> return value? >> >> I just didn't want to change more things on the same patch. >> I can add a patch on top of this series? > > It's terribly odd to make a function that looks like a bool return a > non-boolean value. It can't be that much of a change to do it in this > patch, it's just a matter of running sed.
That is already fixed. Problem was not doing that change, was to fix the rejects after that on the following patches. Later, Juan.
