On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 07:20:09 -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
> On 04/29/2016 11:34 AM, John Ferlan wrote:
> > As it turns out, trusting that being 0 means it wasn't
> > provided isn't such a good idea.
> >
> > If someone provided a of 10 and of 0, then
> > we need to honor it.
> >
> > So this pa
On 04/29/2016 11:34 AM, John Ferlan wrote:
> As it turns out, trusting that being 0 means it wasn't
> provided isn't such a good idea.
>
> If someone provided a of 10 and of 0, then
> we need to honor it.
>
> So this patch which I'll merge into the previous patch will track
> when the XML is
As it turns out, trusting that being 0 means it wasn't
provided isn't such a good idea.
If someone provided a of 10 and of 0, then
we need to honor it.
So this patch which I'll merge into the previous patch will track
when the XML is read if the allocation was provided or not. That
way we can
