cygcheck exit status

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Eric Blake wrote:

> Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please <at> cygwin.com> writes:
>
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:49:06PM +0000, Eric Blake wrote:
> > > <at>  <at>  -1677,7 +1681,7  <at>  <at>  main (int argc, char **argv)
> > >       {
> > >        if (i)
> > >          puts ("");
> > >-       cygcheck (argv[i]);
> > >+       ok &= cygcheck (argv[i]);
> >
> > Why are you anding the result here?  Why not just set ok = cygcheck (...)?
>
> Because it's in a for loop, and when the first file fails but second
> succeeds, you still want the overall command to exit with failure.

That's the correct intent, but shouldn't it be &&= instead of &=,
technically?
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT