On 02/23/2018 09:27 AM, Ján Tomko wrote: > Inspired-by: Laine Stump <laine@xxxxxxxxx> How can I *not* at least look at the patches when you call me out like this! > Day-of-the-week: Friday <6> > > Ján Tomko (16): > vboxDumpSharedFolders: rename non-standard label > vboxDumpSharedFolders: remove pointless comment > vboxDumpSharedFolders: return a value > vboxDumpNetwork: add temp variable for current network > vboxDumpNetwork: rename to vboxDumpNetworks > vboxDumpNetwork: re-introduce this function > vboxDumpNetworks: reduce indentation level > vboxDumpNetwork: allocate the network too > vboxDumpNetworks: delete pointless comment > vboxDumpNetworks: do not allocate def->nets upfront > vboxDumpNetwork: use virMacAddrParseHex > vboxDumpNetwork: Use a single utf16 variable > vboxDumpNetwork: Use a single utf8 temp variable > vboxDumpNetwork: use a switch for attachmentType > vboxDumpNetwork: use VIR_STEAL_PTR instead of VIR_STRDUP > vboxDumpNetwork: use switch for adapterType > > src/vbox/vbox_common.c | 243 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- > 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+), 123 deletions(-) > Nice. Where I had whined, you actually took action! :-) I'm unable to test, but I looked through and each patch looks straightforward and sane (there were bits I didn't like (e.g. perpetuating ignore_value() uses), but they were removed in subsequent patches, so all is good. You say that you've actually tested the code, so as long as you've also run make syntax-check and make check: ACK series https://tinyurl.com/y8hxgcg -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
