On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 14:54 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is intentional, I will look
> at the others.
The last coverity/clang thing is a false positive, but I initialized
reply to NULL anyway, I expect now it will start complaining of possible
NULL dereference :-)
Attached find patches that fixes all other issues (hopefully), one of
them simply dropped an entire function as it turned out I wasn't using
it.
BUMP ?
Simo.
--
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York