On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 07:54:51AM +0000, Chen, Hanxiao wrote: > Hi, Jan > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ján Tomko [mailto:jto...@redhat.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 6:52 PM > > To: Chen, Hanxiao/陈 晗霄 > > Cc: libvir-list@redhat.com > > Subject: Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 1/2] Revert "LXC: create a bind mount for > > sysfs when > > enable userns but disable netns" > > > > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:46:22PM -0400, Chen Hanxiao wrote: > > > This reverts commit a86b6215a74b1feb2667204e214fbfd2f7decc5c. > > > > > > > Only partially. I think it should also revert the netns_disabled > > argrument, see my reply to patch 2/2. > > > > > Discussed at: > > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2015-March/msg01023.html > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanx...@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > > > Conflicts: > > > src/lxc/lxc_container.c > > > > It would be helpful to list the conflicts here (though it looks it was > > just context). > > > > You mean all context in > <<<<<<< HEAD > > ======= > > >>>>>>> parent of > should be posted?
If you only had to move the lines around, writing Conflicts: src/lxc/lxc_container.c - context should be enough. If you had to change them (variables/structures/functions have been renamed since, or their behavior changed), it's nice to mention them. > > There are also some codes depend on this patch, should them be in a separate > patch, > or modified in this revert patch? If they depend on parts of the original commit a86b621, it's okay to do a partial revert (if you say that in the commit message). Jan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
