On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 16:47 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> This code was broken when it landed with commit
> fcc441622ae2632b9b36f352621cfd3baf34dc85 ; it was then later
> updated with 2318b3c5252403a52973eae70c32ff715c7994e7
> 
> But the assertion is just clearly wrong - if we're going to clear the
> previously queued state transition anyways, let's stop warning about
> it.

It's more there because it's potentially a bug if something
double-queues, and I'd like to see that indication so we know that it
happens, otherwise it's harder to track down.  Any instance of this is
technically a bug.  What are you seeing it for?

Dan

_______________________________________________
networkmanager-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list

Reply via email to