On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:01:45PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:16:11PM +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:51:34AM +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 02:26:02AM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
+ */ +gboolean gvir_domain_get_saved(GVirDomain *dom)
The naming needs to be more explicit, libvirt will suspend the domain after a call to virDomainSave or virDomainManagedSave, the current name only checks for the latter state. I'd go for gvir_domain_has_managed_save_image();
I see this patch has been pushed to master with this part unchanged and no discussion whatsoever on the list, what happened there?
Oh, I ACK'd his new patch, without noticing your message in this thread.
And I had missed the other thread too :)
Zeeshan, it's up to the patch submitter to keep track of the comments raised during review,
So sorry, I somehow missed that part of your mail. It was an honest mistake. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124