From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alasdair G Kergon Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 00:00:39 +0100 Subject: LVM2 ./WHATS_NEW ./WHATS_NEW_DM libdm/libdm-de ... In-Reply-To: <87iq826gj3.fsf@twilight.int.mornfall.net.> References: <20100407200443.26841.qmail@sourceware.org> <87iq826gj3.fsf@twilight.int.mornfall.net.> Message-ID: <20100407230038.GG511@agk-dp.fab.redhat.com> List-Id: To: lvm-devel@redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 12:31:44AM +0200, Peter Rockai wrote: > As far as I can tell, this r = 0 is new behaviour that breaks a number > of tests and may break user scripts. Is it necessary? Well the tests weren't working for other reasons, but I want to see what fails and why before deciding what to do about it. The code was inconsistent - if the device being deleted is opened before this if statement, the function would return success, but if the device being deleted is opened just after it (but before the real deletion) it would return failure. (It shouldn't be open at all if this point is reached.) Alasdair