Jean McCormack wrote: > be_mount.c: > line 348: I'm confused as to why you do the be_get_uuid call. uu is > never used after it and > it's not clear there's any side effect. So why do so? If there's > a reason a comment would help. > > line 351: Do you need the if(gen_tmp_altroot) free(tmp_altroot); > code here? > line 477: ditto > > line 545: Aren't we supposed to use strncmp for security reasons? > > line 598: ditto > > line 645: Shouldn't these really be be_errno_t? > > line 679: Nit (there always has to be at least one nit). Remove the > get, it's already on the line above. > > line 828- 841: What happens if the strlcpy actually truncates dir? > > line 851: Is this really none? Maybe something here or in the returns > about tmp_mp. > > line 858 & 861: shouldn't this really be be_errno_t? (Actually this > is going to be a generic comment > since I see it many places) > > line 867: should this be strncpy? > > line 940 & 942: should this be strncmp? > > line 1447: Huh? > > > line 1895: do we need to free altroot? > > line 2175: Maybe file a bug on this? > > > be_utils.c > general: same comment as above for the return types. The comment > says be_errno_t but it returns an int and ret/err are ints. I > know it's really the same thing but it would be nice to see the > cleanup done sometime. Maybe a low level bug? > > line 1710: continaer_ds -> container_ds
fixed... > > line 1754: Is there a bug open on this? No, running BE management commands is currently not supported within a zone. > > line 1755: furture -> future > > line 2478: containder ->container #...@$^$%@ fingers... oh well at least they're consistently wrong ;-) > > cleanup: I believe a close(fd) should be there. what line? Thanks! -evan
