Rejected patches needing review.

[Michael Karcher]

Am Dienstag, den 16.09.2008, 07:58 -0700 schrieb Juan Lang:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> diff --git a/programs/services/services.c b/programs/services/services.c
> index 36ed117..cd71a1f 100644
> --- a/programs/services/services.c
> +++ b/programs/services/services.c
> @@ -106,9 +106,9 @@ static DWORD load_service_config(HKEY hKey, struct
> service_entry *entry)
>          return err;
>      if ((err = load_reg_string(hKey, SZ_DESCRIPTION,  0, &entry->description)) != 0)
>          return err;
> -    if ((err = load_reg_multisz(hKey, SZ_DEPEND_ON_SERVICE, &entry->dependOnServices)) != 0)
> +    if ((err = load_reg_multisz(hKey, SZ_DEPEND_ON_SERVICE, TRUE, &entry->dependOnServices)) != 0)
>          return err;
> -    if ((err = load_reg_multisz(hKey, SZ_DEPEND_ON_GROUP, &entry->dependOnGroups)) != 0)
> +    if ((err = load_reg_multisz(hKey, SZ_DEPEND_ON_GROUP, FALSE, &entry->dependOnGroups)) != 0)
>          return err;

> It seems as though the bAllowSingle variable is useless, as the only
> caller of it tries first with TRUE and again with FALSE.

No, you are reading the patch wrong. It tries to read DependOnService
with TRUE, and aborts if it *fails*. If it succeeds, it loads *another*
setting (DependOnGroup) with FALSE, so definitely not a retry.

Peter, are you sure that windows will handle REG_SZ *only* in the
DependOnService case and fail if you have a REG_SZ in DependOnGroup?

Regards,
  Michael Karcher