[libvirt] patch option needs clarification

[Gene Czarcinski]

On 10/22/2012 09:26 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> I am pretty much complete creating a patch which changes how dnsmasq 
> is started by moving the command line parameters into a conf file. 
> This new file is placed into the same directory and the lease file.
>
> The test for the command line arguments now checks the contents of the 
> conf-file and there is no longer any tests for the command line 
> parameters which are now two.
>
> The first command line parameter is (naturally) --conf-file=<filename>.
>
> The second parameter adds new functionality and is 
> --conf-dir=<directory>.  This directory is placed into the same 
> directory as the conf-file and the lease file.  The name of this 
> directory is "<net-name>.d". This was added to make testing/debugging 
> of new dnsmasq options easier since it no longer requires rebuilding 
> the binaries.  This is also useful for adding log-dhcp and/or 
> log-queries for a specific network.
>
> Now the option question.  I can submit the patch assuming the my 
> previously submitted patch to add --interface to the command line has 
> been applied or I can assume that it has not been applied.  In either 
> case, the new code adds a interface=<dev-name> to the conf-file.
>
> All development and testing was done with 0.10.2 libvirt src.rpm on 
> Fedora 17.
>
> The patch will be submitted based on git.
>
>
I have checked and the patch applies clean to the v0.10.2-maint branch 
but has problems with the top level.  Is providing the patch against the 
v0.10.2-maint branch adequate or do you want it reworked (does not look 
like a big deal) to the top level?

Gene