On 01/18/2017 06:36 AM, Peter Krempa wrote: > The file became a garbage dump for all kinds of utility functions over > time. Move them to a separate file so that the files can become a clean > interface for the storage backends. > --- > po/POTFILES.in | 1 + > src/Makefile.am | 3 +- > src/storage/storage_backend.c | 2950 +------------------------------- > src/storage/storage_backend.h | 124 -- > src/storage/storage_backend_disk.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_backend_fs.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_backend_gluster.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_backend_iscsi.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_backend_mpath.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_backend_rbd.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_backend_scsi.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_backend_sheepdog.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_backend_zfs.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_driver.c | 1 + > src/storage/storage_util.c | 2915 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > src/storage/storage_util.h | 148 ++ > tests/storagevolxml2argvtest.c | 2 +- > 18 files changed, 3112 insertions(+), 3042 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 src/storage/storage_util.c > create mode 100644 src/storage/storage_util.h > This fails to apply even for a 3.0 branch (not withstanding of course the two patches I pushed this morning that were ACK'd but held for 3.0.0 to be released). Conceptually though this would seem to be OK - maybe you could just provide a/your remote branch (wasn't sure which of the git://pipo.sk/pipo/libvirt.git/ ones it would be and I didn't want to search)... John I wonder how much of this "generalization" will be useful for the virtuozzo vstorage patches that were posted yesterday... -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
