On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 03:07:44AM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak@gnome.org>
Passing a 'NULL' value now deletes the corresponding node/tree. --- .../libvirt-gconfig-domain-chardev-source-pty.c | 6 ++ .../libvirt-gconfig-domain-controller.c | 14 ++++- libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-os.c | 20 +++++++ libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-redirdev.c | 14 ++++- libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-seclabel.c | 8 +++ libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++--- libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-object.c | 7 ++- .../libvirt-gconfig-storage-permissions.c | 4 ++ .../libvirt-gconfig-storage-pool-source.c | 4 ++ .../libvirt-gconfig-storage-pool-target.c | 18 ++++++- libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-storage-pool.c | 36 +++++++++++-- .../libvirt-gconfig-storage-vol-backing-store.c | 4 ++ .../libvirt-gconfig-storage-vol-target.c | 14 ++++- libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-storage-vol.c | 32 +++++++++-- 14 files changed, 201 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-chardev-source-pty.c b/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-chardev-source-pty.c index ad47bc4..fd08584 100644 --- a/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-chardev-source-pty.c +++ b/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-chardev-source-pty.c @@ -85,6 +85,12 @@ void gvir_config_domain_source_pty_set_path(GVirConfigDomainChardevSourcePty *pt GVirConfigObject *source; g_return_if_fail(GVIR_CONFIG_IS_DOMAIN_CHARDEV_SOURCE_PTY(pty));
+ if (path == NULL) { + gvir_config_object_delete_child(GVIR_CONFIG_OBJECT(pty), "source", NULL); + + return; + } + source = gvir_config_object_replace_child(GVIR_CONFIG_OBJECT(pty), "source");
_set_path looks buggy before your changes: we want to generate <source path="foo">, and this code would generate <source><path>foo</path></source> if I'm not mistaken.
g_return_if_fail(GVIR_CONFIG_IS_OBJECT(source)); diff --git a/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-controller.c b/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-controller.c index 2024b54..25de002 100644 --- a/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-controller.c +++ b/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-controller.c @@ -115,12 +115,20 @@ guint gvir_config_domain_controller_get_index(GVirConfigDomainController *contro return index; }
+/** + * gvir_config_domain_controller_set_address: + * @address: (allow-none): + */ void gvir_config_domain_controller_set_address(GVirConfigDomainController *controller, GVirConfigDomainAddress *address) { g_return_if_fail(GVIR_CONFIG_IS_DOMAIN_CONTROLLER(controller)); - g_return_if_fail(GVIR_CONFIG_IS_DOMAIN_ADDRESS(address));
- gvir_config_object_attach_replace(GVIR_CONFIG_OBJECT(controller), - GVIR_CONFIG_OBJECT(address)); + if (address == NULL) + gvir_config_object_delete_child(GVIR_CONFIG_OBJECT(controller), + "address", + NULL); + else + gvir_config_object_attach_replace(GVIR_CONFIG_OBJECT(controller), + GVIR_CONFIG_OBJECT(address));
Maybe gvir_config_object_attach_replace could get a (somewhat redundant) const char *child_name argument? Then passing NULL as the GVirConfigObject *child would mean we want to remove the children? This would turn the functions using this into one liners as the ones using set_node_content. I'll need to look more carefully into the rest of the code, but this looks quite mechanical and good. Christophe