Caveat emperor: I'm not familiar with pyblock at all.
Joel Granados Moreno wrote:
---
__init__.py | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/__init__.py b/__init__.py
index 943e127..bb60be6 100644
--- a/__init__.py
+++ b/__init__.py
@@ -190,6 +189,25 @@ def getRaidSets(*disks):
rsList.append(set)
return rsList
+def getDeps(uuid = None, major = None, minor = None, name = None):
+ # If has dpes, return a set of maps, else return an empty set.
+ for map in dm.maps():
+ if map.name == name or \
+ map.uuid == uuid or \
+ (map.dev.minor == minor and map.dev.major == major):
+ return map.deps
+ return ()
+
I assume from the way this function works, that it gets called with either a
name, or a uuid, or a minor major pair. Can either of these never be None in
the map itself? Otherwise the not passed in argument could match!
To me such a multiplexer function feels wrong, since the caller already
indicates what he wants to use to identify the map, why not have 3 methods,
which *clearly* indicate what they do:
getDepsByName
getDepsByUUID
getDepsByDevno
?
+def getTarget(uuid = None, major = None, minor = None, name = None):
+ # Return None if we don't find the map.
+ for map in dm.maps():
+ if map.name == name or \
+ map.uuid == uuid or \
+ (map.dev.minor == minor and map.dev.major == major):
+ return map.table.type
+ return None
+
+
Same comment
Otherwise I see nothing wrong with this.
Regards,
Hans
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
