> Some nits: > > - snoop_smb.c:527: "*p" probably isn't a good name for a variable > with > function-level scope.
OK, how about if I move that declaration to line 587, so the scope is just the "if (flags & F_SUM) ..." block? > - should be using snprintf instead of sprintf, certainly for new > code, > likely for anything touched, and (with some RTI Advocates) > requested > for all code in the same file. I can do that. (I'll do it in webrev2) > - what happened to the error class decode when in detail mode and > non-NT traffic? It's there. It replaces "NT Status" if the message is using old-style error class+code. See lines 568-569 in webrev1. Thanks, Gordon _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list networking-discuss@opensolaris.org
