mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Neil Conway <neil.con...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 45003: Fixed rmdir comment for FTS_SLNONE as per coding guidelines.
Date Sun, 20 Mar 2016 02:33:16 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45003/#review124433
-----------------------------------------------------------




3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp (line 71)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/45003/#comment186996>

    This comment seems incorrect:
    
    (1) The relevant parameters are `FTS_PHYSICAL` vs. `FTS_LOGICAL`, as well as `FTS_COMFOLLOW`.
    
    (2) Since we _do_ set `FTS_PHYSICAL`, isn't it possible for `FTS_SLNONE` to be returned?


- Neil Conway


On March 18, 2016, 12:17 a.m., Jojy Varghese wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/45003/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 18, 2016, 12:17 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Neil Conway.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Fixed rmdir comment for FTS_SLNONE as per coding guidelines.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp cbc97596cd8ed1e6d4261568fd0086c86e063232

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45003/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jojy Varghese
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message