Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:08:47PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:04:00PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
The remote_internal.c code is basically a no-op in its remoteNetworkOpen
method. This means the remote driver will only handle the netwo
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 10:21:42AM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:08:47PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:04:00PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >
> > +#define GET_NETWORK_PRIVATE(conn,retcode)
> >
OK, I ran the second version in a few local and remote cases and
couldn't get it to do bad things, so +1.
Rich.
--
Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/
Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod
Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingd
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:08:47PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:04:00PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > The remote_internal.c code is basically a no-op in its remoteNetworkOpen
> > method. This means the remote driver will only handle the networking
> > APIs, i
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:04:00PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> The remote_internal.c code is basically a no-op in its remoteNetworkOpen
> method. This means the remote driver will only handle the networking
> APIs, if it is also handling the main domain APIs. This works fine if
> connecting
The remote_internal.c code is basically a no-op in its remoteNetworkOpen
method. This means the remote driver will only handle the networking
APIs, if it is also handling the main domain APIs. This works fine if
connecting to a remote URI, or if using QEMU URIs, but it does not work
if using the te
