Hi, Stas Boukarev You're right. We should always use "ns-try-again-condition" instead of "ns-try-again" as most backends does.
Fixed in trunk and earlier branches. P.S. Do you know how to reliably trigger this condition? I want to added "ns-try-again-condition" into our always-broken unit test code, so that all supported platforms could have this condition reported correctly. Thanks, Chun Tian (binghe) 在 2010-9-28，03:10， Stas Boukarev 写道： > ns-try-again-condition is used in several places, but is defined as > ns-try-again. The attached patch renames it to ns-try-again-condition. > Index: condition.lisp > =================================================================== > --- condition.lisp (revision 563) > +++ condition.lisp (working copy) > @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ > error available.")) > > (define-usocket-condition-classes > - (ns-try-again) > + (ns-try-again-condition) > (ns-condition)) > > (define-condition ns-unknown-condition (ns-condition) > Index: backend/cmucl.lisp > =================================================================== > --- backend/cmucl.lisp (revision 563) > +++ backend/cmucl.lisp (working copy) > @@ -209,10 +209,10 @@ > ;; constants mentioned in C > (let ((exception > (second (assoc errno > - '((1 ns-host-not-found-error) ;; HOST_NOT_FOUND > - (2 ns-no-recovery-error) ;; NO_DATA > - (3 ns-no-recovery-error) ;; NO_RECOVERY > - (4 ns-try-again)))))) ;; TRY_AGAIN > + '((1 ns-host-not-found-error) ;; > HOST_NOT_FOUND > + (2 ns-no-recovery-error) ;; NO_DATA > + (3 ns-no-recovery-error) ;; NO_RECOVERY > + (4 ns-try-again-condition)))))) ;; TRY_AGAIN > (when exception > (error exception)))))) > > > -- > With Best Regards, Stas. > _______________________________________________ > usocket-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usocket-devel
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ usocket-devel mailing list [email protected] http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usocket-devel
