On 02/23/2018 09:27 AM, Ján Tomko wrote:
Inspired-by: Laine Stump <laine(a)laine.org>
How can I *not* at least look at the patches when you call me out like this!
Day-of-the-week: Friday <6>
Ján Tomko (16):
vboxDumpSharedFolders: rename non-standard label
vboxDumpSharedFolders: remove pointless comment
vboxDumpSharedFolders: return a value
vboxDumpNetwork: add temp variable for current network
vboxDumpNetwork: rename to vboxDumpNetworks
vboxDumpNetwork: re-introduce this function
vboxDumpNetworks: reduce indentation level
vboxDumpNetwork: allocate the network too
vboxDumpNetworks: delete pointless comment
vboxDumpNetworks: do not allocate def->nets upfront
vboxDumpNetwork: use virMacAddrParseHex
vboxDumpNetwork: Use a single utf16 variable
vboxDumpNetwork: Use a single utf8 temp variable
vboxDumpNetwork: use a switch for attachmentType
vboxDumpNetwork: use VIR_STEAL_PTR instead of VIR_STRDUP
vboxDumpNetwork: use switch for adapterType
src/vbox/vbox_common.c | 243 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
1 file changed, 120 insertions(+), 123 deletions(-)
Nice. Where I had whined, you actually took action! :-)
I'm unable to test, but I looked through and each patch looks
straightforward and sane (there were bits I didn't like (e.g.
perpetuating ignore_value() uses), but they were removed in subsequent
patches, so all is good. You say that you've actually tested the code,
so as long as you've also run make syntax-check and make check:
ACK series
https://tinyurl.com/y8hxgcg