enami tsugutomo <enami@but-b.or.jp> writes:

>> It's an error condition and it should get off the switch statement.
>
> You changed that the break statement doesn't get off the switch
> statement.

Yeah, yamt showed me what you were talking about.
Basically, I think it could be fixed by replacing the break with
return 0, but quite frankly this change has been creating a lot of
hassle and, thus, I backed it out.

Thanks,

-- 
  Rui Paulo			<rpaulo@{NetBSD{,-PT}.org,fnop.net}>