On 06/10/2013 09:45 AM, Doug Goldstein wrote:
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Eric Blake <eblake(a)redhat.com
<mailto:eblake@redhat.com>> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> Commit 894f784948a93760629de3cb195c69ef4f4b831f broke the v1.0.5-maint
> branch because VIR_STRDUP() didn't exist in the v1.0.5 release so the
> resulting build is missing that symbol.
>
> This patch is only for the v1.0.5-maint branch.
> ---
> src/qemu/qemu_migration.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_migration.c b/src/qemu/qemu_migration.c
> index d96805a..606194c 100644
> --- a/src/qemu/qemu_migration.c
> +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_migration.c
> @@ -1223,7 +1223,7 @@ qemuMigrationDriveMirror(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
> virReportOOMError();
> goto error;
> }
> - } else if (VIR_STRDUP(hoststr, host) < 0) {
> + } else if ((hoststr = strdup(host)) == NULL) {
Rather, we should backport c3abb5c45 to the v1.0.5-maint branch, so that
all other patches using VIR_STRDUP can be backported without issue.
That's fine. I took the path of least change in my original patch. The reality
is we'll need a few patches to make VIR_STRDUP "stable".
c3abb5c45988a0d7583f059974513722d82e2c2b # original VIR_STRDUP support
6b74a9f5d98e066f8dfdf5d5ccda68230b516246 # Fix to allow src to be NULL
since a number of places do this and we might backport patches that do
504b4a8dae06330ba1735a28c316c1c68a32c471 # Probably want tests for a maint branch
2da3bc646e6fd1d07f4a663e8efaef8c7e0ba310 # Fix for 6b74a9f5
If I get an ACK on these 4, I'll cherry pick them back to v1.0.5-maint.
Whoops, I just pushed your patch to the maint branch before I saw your and
Jan's responses. If someone wants to do the backport I'll ACK it, but honestly
I don't think it has proven worth the effort at this point.
- Cole