apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] apr_dir_remove_recursively
Date Wed, 23 May 2001 16:23:54 GMT
From: "Ben Collins-Sussman" <sussman@collab.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 10:31 AM

> "William A. Rowe, Jr." <admin@rowe-clan.net> writes:
> > > I agree.  I'm thinking of rewriting it to leave files behind.  I
> > > suspect the routine could return either APR_SUCCESS (if nothing but
> > > was left behind), or some not-yet-invented error code that
> > > specifically means it wasn't able to remove everything.
> > 
> > should simply return the error that the _remove returned, so if there is
> > an error, there was some reason it wasn't completed.  But it still completes
> > all that it is allowed.
> What if 3 different files in the tree (scattered about) are
> un-removable for different reasons?  This function still removes
> everything else and finishes its recursion.  Which of the three status
> codes should it return?

The first it encountered.

Here's the scenario...


If we remove 'some', and fail at file due to EACCESS, we will fail at 'where' 
as well since it contains files, and at 'some' since it contains a directory.
We don't care that we failed because files remain, we care why that file 
remains in the first place.


View raw message