-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/5132/#review7920
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!



src/linux/proc.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/5132/#comment17233>

    doc



src/linux/proc.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/5132/#comment17236>

    consider using utils::os::read()



src/linux/proc.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/5132/#comment17237>

    :)



src/linux/proc.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/5132/#comment17238>

    is this format guaranteed?



src/tests/proc_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/5132/#comment17240>

    s/EXPECT_NE(0/EXPECT_EQ(1/


- Vinod


On 2012-05-15 22:34:27, Benjamin Hindman wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/5132/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2012-05-15 22:34:27)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Alex Degtiar, John Sirois, Vinod Kone, and Jie Yu.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> This patch is a refactor of some parts of the patch at 
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/4167. The plan is to take the components from 
> that patch, break them into smaller patches, and get them committed.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am 333234d 
>   src/linux/proc.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/linux/proc.cpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/tests/proc_tests.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/5132/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> On a Linux machine:
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Benjamin
> 
>

Reply via email to