03.06.2013 22:19, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 06/03/13 14:42, Michael Tokarev wrote:
[]
>> This function has another error -- if the file specified
>> (either for data= or file=) can't be read, it happily
>> continues instead of erroring out. _That_ is the bug
>> I tried to hunt but catched something
On 06/03/13 14:42, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 03.06.2013 16:34, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 06/03/2013 03:20 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>> Initially the code ensured that we have exactly one of data= or file=
>>> option for -acpitable. But after some transformations, the condition
>>> becomes
>>>
>>>
03.06.2013 16:34, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 06/03/2013 03:20 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> Initially the code ensured that we have exactly one of data= or file= option
>> for -acpitable. But after some transformations, the condition becomes
>>
>> if (has_data == has_file) { error }
>>
>> to mean,
On 06/03/2013 03:20 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Initially the code ensured that we have exactly one of
> data= or file= option for -acpitable. But after some
> transformations, the condition becomes
>
> if (has_data == has_file) { error }
>
> to mean, probably, that both should not be set at
Initially the code ensured that we have exactly one of
data= or file= option for -acpitable. But after some
transformations, the condition becomes
if (has_data == has_file) { error }
to mean, probably, that both should not be set at the same
time. But this condition does not cover the case wh
