[parted-devel] [PATCH] Properly sync partitions with operating system

Jim Meyering jim at meyering.net
Fri Feb 20 12:27:24 UTC 2009

Joel Granados <jgranado at redhat.com> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:14:47PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Joel Granados <jgranado at redhat.com> writes:
>> ...
>> >> > If the only values ever returned are non-negative (as it seems they are),
>> >> > then it'd be far more readable to make the return type "unsigned int".
>> >> > Otherwise, I have to wonder if some of these functions may return a
>> >> > negative value, and write code in each caller to handle that.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Seems like a good idea.  And: No, they are supposed to be possitive
>> >> values.  Note this will propagate into other elements of the patch as
>> >> well.
>> >
>> > On the other hand, ped_disk_get_max_partition would need to return -1
>> Yes, but that's a different function.
>> From what I recall reading, your new
> mmm. sorry got confused.
>> >> > > +extern int ped_disk_get_max_partition_num(const PedDisk* disk);
>> merely queries the code for the appropriate partition table type
>> and always returns a non-negative number.
> well.  The specific code in each label might return a negative number
> for error as well.   Think of some spec that defines that maximum number
> as something that might be read from disk (just playing the devils
> advocate here).  The read from disk might fail and then it must be able
> to tell the calling function that something when wrong.

Between now and when parted learns to support
some _new_ partition table type that works that way,
we should have plenty of time...

More information about the parted-devel mailing list