thanks for the comments :).
--Irene
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 18:21 +0800, Harry Lu wrote:
> Do we have a bug number for this patch? Please also add a ChangeLog
> entry for it.
>
>
> + int num_hal_udis, i;
> +
> Should not num_hal_udis be initialized to 0 here? As you might not be
> able to get a value for it in libhal_manager_find_device_string_match().
>
>
>
> + if (!raw_device)
> + continue;
> + libhal_free_string (udi);
>
> Should not udi be freed anyway? If so, you'd better free all values of
> cd_udis after your for loop instead of freeing it here.
>
> And you'd better to enclose the "for" loop in a { } pair. Or it might
> confuse user with the "if" sentence following it.
>
> And should raw_device be freed at last or not?
>
>
>
> Harry
>
> On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 14:44 +0800, Irene (Shi Ying) Huang wrote:
> > Hi, all
> >
> > if the second parameter of
> > nautilus_burn_drive_monitor_get_drive_for_device in nautilus burn is not
> > a raw device, then no NautilusBurnDrive will be returned. This is not
> > correct. I created a patch for identifying whether the input device is a
> > raw device or not, if not, the raw device path correspond to that device
> > will be automatically retrieved, and the correct nautlusburndrive will
> > be returned.
> >
> > The definition of the API is:
> > NautilusBurnDrive *
> > nautilus_burn_drive_monitor_get_drive_for_device
> > (NautilusBurnDriveMonitor *monitor,
> > const char
> > *device)
> >
> > Please review.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > --Irene
> >
>
