On 06/22/2016 11:48 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
It may cause unwanted behaviour (of course, is there any wanted one
for
that case?) so we should rather disable the possibility of doing so.
Resolves:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320893
Signed-off-by: Martin Kletzander <mkletzan(a)redhat.com>
---
src/libvirt-domain.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/libvirt-domain.c b/src/libvirt-domain.c
index 508520efd6c5..89a2d7efe972 100644
--- a/src/libvirt-domain.c
+++ b/src/libvirt-domain.c
@@ -8790,7 +8790,7 @@ virDomainRename(virDomainPtr dom,
virResetLastError();
virCheckDomainReturn(dom, -1);
- virCheckNonNullArgGoto(new_name, error);
+ virCheckNonEmptyStringArgGoto(new_name, error);
Shouldn't both be required? EG We don't want NULL or "" for new_name,
right?
The comments should at least indicate @new_name cannot be NULL or empty
string.
Although it seems remoteDomainRename could pass along a NULL that it
doesn't seem virDomainObjListRename would be very happy to STREQ against.
ACK as long as the NonNullArg is replaced...
John
virCheckReadOnlyGoto(dom->conn->flags, error);
if (dom->conn->driver->domainRename) {