I'm investigating one of the bite-sized bugs, specifically 6383235 for smf_maintain_instance and related library functions. It suggests that some of the return codes from these functions can be aggregated because they don't make sense to the caller.
I've done a review of the return codes from these functions, based on the code and the man pages. Although it's not exhaustive, I can see already that in unusual circumstances they can return codes that are not documented in their man pages. The caller will always have to be written to handle the ones that it can handle, and to issue an error message for anything else. Is this the normal situation, or should it be documented in the man pages? I can also see the appropriate places to remap the SCF_ERROR_DELETED return code, although I can't tell how that particular code would be produced. Is there a test procedure I should be using after I make my code changes? According to the logic of smf_enable_instance(), there may be a few other return codes that could be aggregated as well to better fit the ones listed in the man page. Of course, many of them may never appear. Is there any point to doing this, or should we wait for another bug report? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
