Re: svn commit: r22494 - in trunk/subversion: libsvn_repos tests/cmdline

[David Glasser <gl...@mit.edu>]

On 11/28/06, malcolm@tigris.org <ma...@tigris.org> wrote:

> +  if (!APR_PROC_CHECK_EXIT(exitwhy))
> +    {
> +      failure_message = svn_stringbuf_createf(pool,
> +        _("'%s' hook failed (did not exit cleanly: "
> +          "exitwhy was %d, exitcode was %d).  "),
> +        name, exitwhy, exitcode);

Is somebody reading this actually going to know what an exitwhy is?
Maybe it would even be better to say apr_exit_why_e instead (which is
at least better Google fodder)?

--dave


-- 
David Glasser | glasser@mit.edu | http://www.davidglasser.net/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: svn commit: r22494 - in trunk/subversion: libsvn_repos tests/cmdline

[Malcolm Rowe <ma...@farside.org.uk>]

On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 10:16:02PM -0500, David Glasser wrote:
> On 11/28/06, malcolm@tigris.org <ma...@tigris.org> wrote:
> 
> >+  if (!APR_PROC_CHECK_EXIT(exitwhy))
> >+    {
> >+      failure_message = svn_stringbuf_createf(pool,
> >+        _("'%s' hook failed (did not exit cleanly: "
> >+          "exitwhy was %d, exitcode was %d).  "),
> >+        name, exitwhy, exitcode);
> 
> Is somebody reading this actually going to know what an exitwhy is?
> Maybe it would even be better to say apr_exit_why_e instead (which is
> at least better Google fodder)?
> 

Good idea, r22568.  I was toying with the idea of specialising that
message even further, where possible ("killed by signal 15", for
example), but I thought that was probably overkill for one thing, and
not particularly portable for another.

Regards,
Malcolm