For actions, switch bool success into an exit code.

For actions, switch bool success into an exit code.

This way we can signal specific error conditions and then
send appropriate events to Omaha from the UpdateAttempter.

BUG=560
TEST=unit tests, gmerged and looked at logs

[adlr, 2010-07-19 18:05:16]

LGTM, but a question

why -1 for the error? presumably we'll have more error codes (1, 2, 3, etc) for
errors, which are all positive. So would -1 be more like "unknown error" or
"generic error"?

[petkov, 2010-07-19 18:08:53]

On 2010/07/19 18:05:16, adlr wrote:
> LGTM, but a question
> 
> why -1 for the error? presumably we'll have more error codes (1, 2, 3, etc)
for
> errors, which are all positive. So would -1 be more like "unknown error" or
> "generic error"?

Yes. I was thinking we can do negatives for errors that are shared/common across
actions and positives for action specific codes. In this case it's an
Unknown/Generic error. This way we can keep the shared code separate from the
action-specific code in the enum list.

I'm open to changing this though?

[adlr, 2010-07-19 18:14:30]

I'm fine w/ all positive or all negative. It might be pain if we ever want
to switch a number from negative or positive or vice-versa, right?

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:08 AM, <petkov@chromium.org> wrote:

> On 2010/07/19 18:05:16, adlr wrote:
>
>> LGTM, but a question
>>
>
>  why -1 for the error? presumably we'll have more error codes (1, 2, 3,
>> etc)
>>
> for
>
>> errors, which are all positive. So would -1 be more like "unknown error"
>> or
>> "generic error"?
>>
>
> Yes. I was thinking we can do negatives for errors that are shared/common
> across
> actions and positives for action specific codes. In this case it's an
> Unknown/Generic error. This way we can keep the shared code separate from
> the
> action-specific code in the enum list.
>
> I'm open to changing this though?
>
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3022008/show
>

[petkov, 2010-07-19 18:19:45]

PTAL. Switched to a positive generic error code of 1. Maybe we can reserve the
first N error codes for generic codes and start the action-specific codes from
N+1.

[adlr, 2010-07-19 18:25:39]

LGTM

I guess if we had a bunch of possible error codes, we could think about
organizing them.

-andrew

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:19 AM, <petkov@chromium.org> wrote:

> PTAL. Switched to a positive generic error code of 1. Maybe we can reserve
> the
> first N error codes for generic codes and start the action-specific codes
> from
> N+1.
>
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3022008/show
>