Re: [mlmmj] [PATCH 00 of 10] mlmmj-maintd.c tweaks

[Ben Schmidt <mail_ben_schmidt@yahoo.com.au>]

Thanks again for this, Richard, and sorry for taking so long to get
around to looking at it. The work is great, and you made my life really
easy by writing clear patches and log messages, and ensuring each
changeset dealt with a single bug.

I have applied patches 01 and 04 through 10 as is, though I have removed
your email address from the author field of the changeset, just so that
it doesn't get exposed to the world unobfuscated through our hg web
interface, and in case it changes. One day I might keep a list of
contributors' contact details in a file in the distribution, but that
can wait.

Regarding patches 02 and 03, I love this work, but I will leave applying
it until we can do it throughout the codebase rather than just in
mlmmj-maintd. The 'wait for child' function should go in a separate file
and be linked into and called by all the executables that fork. If you'd
like to make a more comprehensive patch to do this, I would be very
grateful.

Thanks once again.

Smiles,

Ben.



On 28/01/11 9:59 AM, Richard Mortimer wrote:
> All,
>
> As mentioned the other day here are a number of patches against
> mlmmj-maintd.c that fix relatively minor issues. I haven't attempted
> to make any changes outside of this one file but intend to look at those
> over the coming month or two as time allows.
>
> I have also spotted a couple of other issues that I haven't addressed yet.
> The first is the fact that unlink calls never have their error status
> checked. I was thinking about introducing a myunlink() method that does
> the unlink and reports any error. That would help catch any permissions
> problems. There is a potential that some of the files might not exist
> in all situations (the -probe files for example) so it might not be
> appropriate to log an error in all circumstances.
>
> Also there are a couple of places in mlmmj-maintd.c where it doesn't find
> the contents of the files that it expects. It just carries onto the next
> file without logging an error.
>
> Review comments most welcome.
>
> Regards
>
> Richard
>
>
>