"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 01:07:49PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
...
>> Here's an incremental diff that also includes additional changes, e.g.,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> - enable the syntax-check for strerror
>> - change more "out of error" reports to use virReportOOMError
>> - use QEMUD_ERROR consistently
...
>> diff --git a/Makefile.nonreentrant b/Makefile.nonreentrant
>> index 13fa59d..b567f31 100644
>> --- a/Makefile.nonreentrant
>> +++ b/Makefile.nonreentrant
>> @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ NON_REENTRANT += setstate
>> NON_REENTRANT += sgetspent
>> NON_REENTRANT += srand48
>> NON_REENTRANT += srandom
>> -# NON_REENTRANT += strerror
>> +NON_REENTRANT += strerror
>> NON_REENTRANT += strtok
>> NON_REENTRANT += tmpnam
>> NON_REENTRANT += ttyname
>> diff --git a/qemud/Makefile.am b/qemud/Makefile.am
>> index 372b931..a0c161a 100644
>> --- a/qemud/Makefile.am
>> +++ b/qemud/Makefile.am
>> @@ -107,7 +107,6 @@ libvirtd_LDADD = \
>> if ! WITH_DRIVER_MODULES
>> if WITH_QEMU
>> libvirtd_LDADD += ../src/libvirt_driver_qemu.la
>> -libvirtd_LDADD += ../src/libvirt_util.la
>> endif
>>
>> if WITH_LXC
>
> Someting seems not right here - we shouldn't need this change,
> since this shouldn't be added in the first place.
That's the *incremental* change, against what you reviewed the
first time.
>> diff --git a/src/network_driver.c b/src/network_driver.c
>> index 8d7340e..4138939 100644
>> --- a/src/network_driver.c
>> +++ b/src/network_driver.c
>> @@ -904,16 +904,17 @@ static int networkStartNetworkDaemon(virConnectPtr conn,
>> err_delbr2:
>> networkRemoveIptablesRules(driver, network);
>>
>> - err_delbr1:;
>> - char ebuf[1024];
>> + err_delbr1:
>> if (network->def->ipAddress &&
>> (err = brSetInterfaceUp(driver->brctl, network->def->bridge, 0))) {
>> + char ebuf[1024];
>> networkLog(NETWORK_WARN, _("Failed to bring down bridge '%s' : %s\n"),
>> network->def->bridge, virStrerror(err, ebuf, sizeof ebuf));
>> }
>
> This also appears to be changing code which doesn't exist.
Same as above.
> [snip more of the same]
>
> Have you got the actual patch against current CVS, since this doesn't
> appear to be it ?
Yep. It was attached at the end, after this:
>> Here's the 10-change-set sequence:
--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list