Am 24.09.2013 um 13:50 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> When trying to update the refcounts for a snapshot, the return value of
> update_refcount on a compressed cluster was pretty much ignored,
> cancelling the update on error but returning 0. This is caused by an
> inner "ret" variable shadowing the
When trying to update the refcounts for a snapshot, the return value of
update_refcount on a compressed cluster was pretty much ignored,
cancelling the update on error but returning 0. This is caused by an
inner "ret" variable shadowing the outer one (the latter is used in the
return statement).
S
