On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 08:55:11AM -0500, Anurag S. Maskey wrote:
> Renee Danson Sommerfeld wrote:
> >>requesting code review for the following bugs:
> >>
> >>   9012 It's better if the output of 'nwamcfg list' and 'nwamadm list'
> >>   is not random sequence.
> >>   http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=9012
> >>
> >>   11548 nwamcfg says lies about nothing to commit
> >>   http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=11548
> >>
> >>   11987 nwamcfg should have a way to display all available properties
> >>   for an object
> >>   http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=11987
> >>
> >>http://zhadum.east/export/ws/am223141/checkout-area/nwam1-fixes/webrev/
> >nwamcfg.c
> >1164: This seems like an odd condition for whether or not we should
> >     print the message; I thought the condition was going to be
> >     whether or not the user explicitly performed the commit (i.e.
> >     she typed the 'commit' command, versus having the commit
> >     happen implicitly because she typed 'end').  The value of
> >     interactive_mode would be true in both cases, wouldn't it?
> This wasn't happening because commit_func() was called by end_func()
> only if there was something to commit.
> 
> However, I did make a change so that do_commit() is the function
> that does the libnwam calls to nwam_*_commit().  It is also called
> by commit_func().  end_func() calls do_commit() directly, so the
> message is not printed.  This approach is cleaner than relying on
> commit_func() only being called if there is something to commit.
> Now, if commit_func() is only called when "commit" is explicitly
> typed.  All implicit commits go directly to do_commit(). (Also, made
> similar change to cancel_func() and do_cancel().)  webrev updated.

Sounds good.

> >libnwam_object.c
> >name_cmp(): If I'm reading this code correctly, it would sort a
> >     list of two link/interface pairs as:
> >
> >     TYPE         PROFILE   STATE            ncp          User
> >online               ncu:ip       e1000g0   online           ncu:phys
> >e1000g0   online             ncu:ip       wpi0      offline
> >     ncu:phys     wpi0      offline
> >
> >     I like that the link/interface pairs are grouped; but I
> >     think the ordering should be swapped (i.e. don't sort the
> >     ip vs. phys part alphabetically).  It seems more logical
> >     to me for the thing that has to come up first (the link)        to be
> >listed first.
> Nope, it's the other way.  The link ncus are listed before the
> interface ncus.  The reason is that nwam_ncu_type_t has _LINK listed
> before _INTERFACE, so ncu:phys appear before ncu:ip.  When the NCU
> type/class is not specified, the code explicitly lists _LINK before
> _INTERFACE.

Cool, the sample output you sent looks good.  Thanks for clarifying!

-renee

Reply via email to