On Thu, 2009-03-19 at 14:19 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Thursday, March 19 2009, David Lehman said: > > On Thu, 2009-03-19 at 14:07 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: > > > --- > > > storage/udev.py | 9 ++++++++- > > > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > On second thought, why would you leave behind the know-good sysfs path > > and then recreate it in __is_blacklisted_blockdev when you could just > > pass the sysfs path as the sole argument? > > Then we'd have to instead do basename in various places. It's really > six of one, half dozen of the other Man -- I think the intricacies of sysfs paths are way more prone to breaking than basename, but there is some uncertainty either way. > > Jeremy > > _______________________________________________ > Anaconda-devel-list mailing list > Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
