From: "Amit Kapila" <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
> If you think that above scenario is not possible, then you just need to
> modify comment:
> "! * Remove old symlink in recovery...."
Hm, my scenario seems impossible. I reverted the comment.
> One more minor point about patch:
> + struct stat st;
>
> if (InRecovery)
> {
> struct stat st;
>
> Defining stat struct two times in same function in different ways doesn't
> seem to be good, we can do the same way for new usage as is already
> done in code or may be declare it once.
OK, I removed the second (existing) definition of st.
Regards
MauMau