Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] eliminate strerror from qemu_driver.c: use virReportSystemError instead

2009-02-02 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 11:38:33AM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: Jim Meyering j...@meyering.net wrote: Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 09:54:59PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: diff --git a/src/qemu_driver.c b/src/qemu_driver.c You can actually just kill off

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] eliminate strerror from qemu_driver.c: use virReportSystemError instead

2009-02-02 Thread Jim Meyering
Jim Meyering j...@meyering.net wrote: Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 09:54:59PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: diff --git a/src/qemu_driver.c b/src/qemu_driver.c You can actually just kill off the SetNonBlock method, since we added one to util.h. We should

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] eliminate strerror from qemu_driver.c: use virReportSystemError instead

2009-01-30 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 09:54:59PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: diff --git a/src/qemu_driver.c b/src/qemu_driver.c index 36e12b2..8fd789d 100644 --- a/src/qemu_driver.c +++ b/src/qemu_driver.c @@ -89,31 +89,19 @@ static void qemuDriverUnlock(struct qemud_driver *driver) static int

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] eliminate strerror from qemu_driver.c: use virReportSystemError instead

2009-01-30 Thread Jim Meyering
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 09:54:59PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: diff --git a/src/qemu_driver.c b/src/qemu_driver.c You can actually just kill off the SetNonBlock method, since we added one to util.h. We should probably do same for SetCloseExec since

[libvirt] [PATCH] eliminate strerror from qemu_driver.c: use virReportSystemError instead

2009-01-29 Thread Jim Meyering
I've begun eliminating the remaining problematic uses of strerror. For example, those in virsh.c aren't a problem. This is required for thread safety. After this patch, there are about 60 uses left. Note while reviewing: - are there places where I've added uses of conn that I should not have?