From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Neary Subject: Re: thoughts on DPDK after a few days of reading sources Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 11:13:52 -0500 Message-ID: <56BCB340.6040208@redhat.com> References: <20160211030540.GB25680@hunt> <2593509.xiuDro8IbH@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Thomas Monjalon , Seth Arnold Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DCC0379E for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 17:13:55 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <2593509.xiuDro8IbH@xps13> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi, On 02/11/2016 02:58 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2016-02-10 19:05, Seth Arnold: > [...] >> It's nearly impossible to solve issues without error reporting. Good >> error reporting saves admins time and money. > > Until now, the errors were reported on the list and most often fixed quickly. > While I agree we need a more formal process (a bug tracker), I think we must > be noticed of new bugs on the mailing list. > Since nobody was against the bugzilla proposal, a deployment will be planned. > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-August/023012.html I may have misunderstood Seth's comment, but it looked like he was talking about checking errno after fopen and reporting the error with perror or strerror in the event of a non-zero return. Seth, did I understand correctly? Thanks, Dave. -- Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338