On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Daniel Ruggeri <drugg...@primary.net> wrote:
> Hi, Yann;
> I'm out of town and far from a usable system to investigate the code at the
> moment. On a quick review, this doesn't ring a bell. I assume it came with
> the original code donation. Seems to make sense since originally this
> functionality was all in it's own module. Based on the context, I am
> guessing you've detected the config struct is created and set twice, thus
> losing potential parameters. If that's the case, I'm confident removing the
> second occurrence should be fine.
Ok, thanks Daniel (and sorry for the inconvenience).