Re: [hackers] [dwm][PATCH] Do not call die() upon '-v' invocation

From: Quentin Rameau <>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:21:18 +0200

> On 2016-10-28 13:02, Quentin Rameau wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 12:45:14PM +0000, Ali H. Fardan wrote:
> >> actually, imo, I think
> >> usage() should return success.
> > Surely not.
> > The call to usage() is made when wrong options have been passed to
> > the tool, you wouldn't return “no error” code when there actually
> > has been an error.
> How could a script test if 'foo' is compiled correctly and runs
> without any missing shared libraries? if such a thing existed it will
> return 1> else, 0 is returned, the program still works fine, you just
> didn't give it the right arguments.
You're clearly on the wrong path for what you want to test here.

A script wouldn't test on runtime if there has been some compile-time

That's not for the tool to tell you if it has been correctly built or
not, its behaviour is expected to be built correctly.
If not, that's your fault (or the packager you trust do to it for you,
actually again your responsability).
Received on Fri Oct 28 2016 - 15:21:18 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 28 2016 - 15:24:15 CEST