On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 02:29:14PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: > "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > ... > > No, they are all correct AFAIK. The *existing* code was buggy using > > the wrong macros in many places. > ... > > You need to compare with the function context shown in the patch, rather > > than assume the original code was correct :-) > > Yeah, "assuming" can cause trouble ;-) > > It would help others down the road if there were a note > in the ChangeLog that this change set also fixes several bugs. I comitted this in two parts, the first doing the bug fix. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list