Hey Ethan,

Yes passing in the name of the BE is much more deterministic. I made the change 
and tested it successfully.

Thanks
Tim

Ethan Quach wrote:
> Hey Tim,
> 
> I've just got one comment.  On line 276, the second argument is now 
> changed to
> "None".  When "None" is passed in, beCopy() will assume we're operating 
> on the
> current BE.  That's probably the right assumption for this case, but 
> since we've
> got the name of the BE we're operating on in self.be_name, why not just 
> pass that
> in?
> 
> 
> -ethan
> 
> 
> Tim Knitter wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Are there any more comments on this code review? I'd like to integrate 
>> so snapshots names that are produced by libbe during a failed 
>> install/uninstall attempt aren't so unwieldy when displayed with 
>> 'beadm list -s' and 'zfs list'.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Tim
>>
>> Shawn Walker wrote:
>>  
>>> 2008/5/22 Tim Knitter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>    
>>>> Hello pkg'ers,
>>>>
>>>> Could someone please review the following:
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~tsk/1981_pgate/
>>>> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=1981
>>>>
>>>> It is a very simple change and doesn't require much time to review.
>>>>       
>>> I only have one nitpick:
>>>
>>>       290 +                        ret, self.be_name_clone, notUsed = \
>>>
>>> This file seems to mix lowerCamelCase with our traditional naming
>>> style of "foo_bar."
>>>
>>> Can notUsed become "not_used" ?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>     
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkg-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
>>   
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to