Chromium Code Reviews| Index: omaha_request_action.cc |
| diff --git a/omaha_request_action.cc b/omaha_request_action.cc |
| index bb2275d2f78e58389702854bb1348b7ebd18e888..c74ea8d648b420d1eeda41300829a6831f7f01d9 100644 |
| --- a/omaha_request_action.cc |
| +++ b/omaha_request_action.cc |
| @@ -341,13 +341,6 @@ void OmahaRequestAction::TransferComplete(HttpFetcher *fetcher, |
| LOG(INFO) << "Omaha request response: " << string(response_buffer_.begin(), |
| response_buffer_.end()); |
| - // Events are best effort transactions -- assume they always succeed. |
| - if (IsEvent()) { |
| - CHECK(!HasOutputPipe()) << "No output pipe allowed for event requests."; |
| - completer.set_code(kActionCodeSuccess); |
|
petkov
2011/01/12 01:10:22
Here you could:
if (event->result ==
OmahaEvent::
petkov
2011/01/12 01:17:08
Of course I meant:
if (event->result == OmahaEven
|
| - return; |
| - } |
| - |
| if (!successful) { |
| LOG(ERROR) << "Omaha request network transfer failed."; |
| int code = GetHTTPResponseCode(); |
| @@ -359,6 +352,17 @@ void OmahaRequestAction::TransferComplete(HttpFetcher *fetcher, |
| kActionCodeOmahaRequestHTTPResponseBase + code)); |
| return; |
| } |
| + |
| + // Events are best effort transactions, but it's still okay to fail them, |
|
petkov
2011/01/12 01:10:22
This is somewhat dangerous. The code runs for both
|
| + // (which happens above) since we can use the failure code to decide if we |
| + // should signal the crash reporter about a failure. |
| + // If we get here, assume success for the Event. |
| + if (IsEvent()) { |
| + CHECK(!HasOutputPipe()) << "No output pipe allowed for event requests."; |
| + completer.set_code(kActionCodeSuccess); |
| + return; |
| + } |
| + |
| if (!HasOutputPipe()) { |
| // Just set success to whether or not the http transfer succeeded, |
| // which must be true at this point in the code. |