Re: [PATCH v2] init: make init failures more explicit

2013-10-18 Thread Michael Opdenacker
On 10/18/2013 02:20 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Michael Opdenacker > wrote: >> + pr_err("Starting init: %s exists but couldn't execute it >> (error: %d - see errno-base.h and errno.h)\n", > IMHO the "- see errno-base.h and errno.h" is a bit overk

Re: [PATCH v2] init: make init failures more explicit

2013-10-18 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Michael Opdenacker wrote: > + pr_err("Starting init: %s exists but couldn't execute it > (error: %d - see errno-base.h and errno.h)\n", IMHO the "- see errno-base.h and errno.h" is a bit overkill. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert

[PATCH v2] init: make init failures more explicit

2013-10-18 Thread Michael Opdenacker
This patch proposes to make init failures more explicit. Before this, the "No init found" message didn't help much. It could sometimes be misleading and actually mean "No *working* init found". This message could hide many different issues: - no init program candidates found at all - some init pr