-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 11/09/2009 08:47 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 11:23 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 08:01:39PM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 13:24 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>> Except some rare cases out use of tevent_req_is_error() was dangerous.
>>> Almost everywhere where we used it it was probably ok, but given the
>>> semantics of that function I think using the macro in this patch is much
>>> safer.
>>
>> Bad patch,
>> attached a new one that actually compiles ...
>>
>> Simo.
>>
>
> Patch does not apply, please rebase. It looks ok by visual inspection
> but I would like to run some 'real' tests.
It is based on top of my previous patch "Cleanups".
> Will you try to fix this issue upstream ?
There is nothing to fix upstream, the interface is clear and useful as
is, we were just using it in a dangerous way.
Simo.
Patch looks good to me. Ack.
- --
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761
Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkr4Tl0ACgkQeiVVYja6o6NQAwCgpGAybxQRHZpDTx0ld80guySE
ZeYAoKtnaThelQzTsK3uWuWmmyCnnPxL
=XxVG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----