On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 03:16:33PM +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 03:50:40PM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Christophe Fergeau > > <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > "if they are *really* needed". As we can't remove functions once they get > > > into a release, I'd rather that we live without these functions for now, > > > and see how different apps use the OsinfoMedia class, > > > > There is no need to see. I already gave you example of one app > > (actually there is no other user app ATM that I know of) that will > > make use of the API I'm proposing. > > I've put an emphasis on the 'really' for a reason. Boxes can do with the > API I'm adding without any issues. > > > If you could give me one reason why apps will want to make two calls > > while they can make just one, I might get convinced. > > This is not about apps, this is about libosinfo providing APIs that makes > sense, rather than having libosinfo grow various overlapping APIs because > this is more convenient for X, Y or Z. > You are suggesting merging OsinfoMedia creation (ie > osinfo_media_create_from_location) with media identification > (osinfo_db_identify_media). What if we have users who want to identify a > media that does not have an associated location? The test suite (test/test-isodetect.c) is actually an existing user of osinfo_db_identify_media which creates the media from scratch (osinfo_media_new + manual setting of entity properties). Christophe
Attachment:
pgp0ZbgEValiy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ virt-tools-list mailing list virt-tools-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virt-tools-list
