On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:10:06PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 09.03.2019 um 10:40 hat Niels de Vos geschrieben: > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 02:11:51PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > > Am 05.03.2019 um 16:46 hat Niels de Vos geschrieben: > > > > Gluster 6 is currently available as release candidate. There have been a > > > > few changes to libgfapi.so that need to be adapted by consuming projects > > > > like QEMU. Fedora Rawhide already contains glusterfs-6.0-RC0, and this > > > > prevents rebuilds of QEMU there (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1684298). > > > > > > > > The following two changes should be sufficient to consume Gluster 6 once > > > > it is released. These have been tested on CentOS-7 with Gluster 5 and > > > > Gluster 6 (minimal manual qemu-img tests only). > > > > > > > > This v2 post contains changes suggested by Daniel P. Berrangé and Kevin > > > > Wolf. Thanks! > > > > > > Thanks, applied to the block branch. > > > > Thanks! Stefano Garzarella gave a suggestion for further cleanup. I was > > planning to address that (no #ifdef for function arguments) next week > > when I'm back from a trip, Is that something you would also like to see, > > or do you prefer the change to stay minimal/small as it is now? I'm > > happy to send a followup if you agree that it is cleaner. > > I don't mind either way. > > I'm going to send a pull request tomorrow for soft freeze, but if you > tell me that I should wait with this one, I can remove it from my queue > for now. It's a bug fix, so we can still apply an updated version during > the freeze. > > A follow-up works for me, too, so whatever you prefer.
In that case, I prefer to keep the current patches as they are. If further changes make the code much better readable/maintainable I would have provided a new version. But at the moment, and after a little more consideration, I do not think there is much benefit in the cleanup Stefano suggested. Thanks, Niels