On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 09:28:01AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 08:16:21 +0200, Fabiano Fidêncio wrote:
86fbce56f27e removed the constant, but didn't actually adjust the only place where the constant was used.
Signed-off-by: Fabiano Fidêncio <fidencio@redhat.com> --- This patch fixes a build breakage.
It's either this, or reverting 86fbce56f27e.
I've reverted it now sice the premise that the constant was unused is wrong. A separate patch can e.g. squash this change and the removal of the constant with a better justification perhaps. Obviously that will need to go through review again to consider the merit of the justification.
Yes, I screwed up. I removed use of this constant in my pending branch but forgot this. I notice the constant declaration was unused. It genuinely was unused when first introduced, but later it was made use of. Unfortunately when searching the history I jumped straight over the place which introduced its use, making it appear to me as if it was never used :-( Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|