patches, probably all post-alpha

David Lehman dlehman at redhat.com
Mon Sep 10 15:09:21 UTC 2012


On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 16:17 -0700, Brian C. Lane wrote:
> These look pretty good to me. The only comments I had were:
> 
> 1/5 - the logic for the invalid mountpoint names is a bit hard to parse,
> maybe some comments. Also, I'm not sure if both regexes are needed it
> looked like one looks for any . in the mountpoint and the other looks
> for . at the end of the string, which the first would catch.

The first one checks for a pair of slashes enclosing nothing or only
dots. The second checks for slash-plus-any-non-zero-number-of-dots at
the end of the mountpoint.

I'll add a comment listing the rules.

> 
> 5/5 - The errors are a bit scary :) Telling the user 'Potentially fatal
> error' without any additional info is going to be confusing. Maybe use
> the click on info bar method to display the actual error from e?

Yeah, the reporting is sort of half-baked. I'm going to have to improve
the error messages somewhat if we're going to be displaying them to
users.

> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> anaconda-patches mailing list
> anaconda-patches at lists.fedorahosted.org
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-patches




More information about the anaconda-patches mailing list