Chris Lalancette wrote:
...
>> - _("Failed to create inactive domain %s\n"), def->name);
>> + _("Failed to create inactive domain %s"), def->name);
>> goto error;
>> }
>
> ACK to this part, certainly.
>
> I'm not sure a new syntax-check rule (which may have false positives) is worth it;
> the fact that there are so few occurrences of the problem in the codebase seems
> to say that it's not a huge problem, and I don't want to make sytnax-check fail
> for people for bogus reasons.
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the review.
I already pushed it, based on a prior ack.
If/when problems arise, we'll deal with it by improving
the check, allowing exemption(s) via its .x-sc... file,
or simply by removing the test altogether.
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list