[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: cvs exit status
From: |
Paul Sander |
Subject: |
Re: cvs exit status |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Oct 2001 14:43:14 -0700 |
>--- Forwarded mail from address@hidden
>[ On Wednesday, October 10, 2001 at 10:57:50 (-0700), Paul Sander wrote: ]
>> Subject: Re: cvs exit status
>>
>> Under some error conditions, the exit status gets incremented rather than
>> being set to a fixed value. That means that under those error conditions,
>> the exit status varies and may sometimes indicate success (due to overflow)
>> if there are a lot of problems.
>>
>> So, exit status is not a reliable way to detect problems. You must parse
>> the CVS standard output and standard error streams for relevant messages.
>What's wrong with using relational tests?!?!?!? Don't you do that
>anyway just as a matter of careful robust programming?
What happens on a Unix system when the exit status exceeds 127? It overflows.
An incremented exit status can (and does) report success in the presence of
failures.
>--- End of forwarded message from address@hidden
- file,t, Wim Dausy, 2001/10/10
- cvs exit status, Andrea Montefusco, 2001/10/10
- Re: cvs exit status, Paul Sander, 2001/10/10
- Re: cvs exit status, Greg A. Woods, 2001/10/10
- Re: cvs exit status,
Paul Sander <=
- Re: cvs exit status, Greg A. Woods, 2001/10/11
- Re: cvs exit status, Paul Sander, 2001/10/11
- Re: cvs exit status, Greg A. Woods, 2001/10/11
- Re: cvs exit status, Paul Sander, 2001/10/11
- Re: cvs exit status, Greg A. Woods, 2001/10/12
- Re: cvs exit status, Paul Sander, 2001/10/12
Re: file,t, Larry Jones, 2001/10/10