On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Reshetova, Elena
<elena.reshet...@intel.com> wrote:
> Here is the draft for the changed patch. Is it along the lines you were
> thinking about?
> Please ignore the small details such as cosmetics and etc. now: I am still
> planning to test it properly and cleanup, but first I want to understand if
> I am moving towards the right way.
Things like:
..., XATTR{foo}="foo", XATTR{bar}="bar"
would just eat the entire foo key. That is intentional? We usually
have lists for that, or we would not allow 2 keys ...
The tokens in the enum are the sort order of execution, the order has
meaning, it's not just a list. The XATTR key belongs more to the other
permissions keys than to the end of the list.
If pairs of values that belong to each other are allocated, we better
check if we run into allocation problems. Udev ignores that in some
places and goes ahead as the value would not have been set at all. But
with pairs, we should not end up with inconsistent pairs which have
only the name or the value set.
The:
if ((xattr_name) && (xattr_label))
should then just become:
if (xattr_name)
.
Thanks,
Kay
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
