On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:26:47 -0700
Renee Danson Sommerfeld <renee.sommerfeld at sun.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:21:00PM -0700, Michael Hunter wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 11:09:00 -0700
> > Renee Danson Sommerfeld <renee.sommerfeld at sun.com> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > > This is why I recommended the more hacky approach. I don't *like* it,
> > > but it seems like the only feasible answer for right now.
> >
> > New webrev in /net/coupe.eng/builds/mph/nwam1_work/webrev
>
> This looks good, I think we're getting really close here.
>
> net-loc
> 594: In response to a previous comment, you said this pg was used in
> the following block; but I don't see where. It seems to me the
> next place it's used is down in the block where it used to be
> created, at lines 658-666. Wouldn't it be better to create it
> there?
>
> I think you originally moved it up because the version property
> was going to be in that pg; but that had to be changed. So I
> don't see any purpose for having it here.
ACCEPT
>
> 617-634: On the beautifying (or, making less ugly) front: here we have
> essentially the same line repeated 6 times; this could probably be
> a function, yes?
I rewrote it as one line.
>
> 635-36: I feel like I must be missing something here, but: isn't line
> 636 removing everything you copied over in line 635 with the
> copy_user_files script?
Well that is busted. Fixed.
>
> net-nwam
> 314: Will the -f check work for the special values of /none, /allow,
> and /deny?
ACCEPT
new webrev at /net/coupe.eng/builds/mph/nwam1_work/webrev
Michael
>
> -renee
