On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 3:06 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>
>> I seem to remember that we came to the conclusion that
>> bdrv_has_snapshot() isn't needed at all and should be dropped. Any user
>> should be using bdrv_can_snapshot() instead as this is what they really
>> want.
>
> Our reasoning ada
Kevin Wolf writes:
> Am 28.05.2010 20:18, schrieb Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho:
>> Both bdrv_can_snapshot() and bdrv_has_snapshot() does not work as advertized.
>>
>> First issue: Their names implies different porpouses, but they do the same
>> thing
>> and have exactly the same code. Maybe copied a
Am 28.05.2010 20:18, schrieb Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho:
> Both bdrv_can_snapshot() and bdrv_has_snapshot() does not work as advertized.
>
> First issue: Their names implies different porpouses, but they do the same
> thing
> and have exactly the same code. Maybe copied and pasted and forgotten?
> b
