Checking the double call to the system function in method MIns…#2
Open
fitorec wants to merge 1 commit intoantiX-Linux:masterfrom
Open
Checking the double call to the system function in method MIns…#2fitorec wants to merge 1 commit intoantiX-Linux:masterfrom
fitorec wants to merge 1 commit intoantiX-Linux:masterfrom
Conversation
…:makeLinuxPartition
Contributor
|
Thanks for your post. The development for the antiX and MX installer takes place here: https://github.com/gazelle-installer/gazelle-installer so post there if you wish. This one is very old. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I Checked the end of the
MInstall::makeLinuxPartitionfunction and apparently on line500it is executed and it is checked that it is executed correctly, later if the partition matches withext *, the command is modified and in my opinion that is when the command should be executed again. In the rest of the times we only execute the same command twice.I tried to review the logic of this function a bit and the nesting level confused me a bit, on the other hand there are comparisons that apparently will never be fulfilled, for example:
I would like to refactor this function, adding some unified test, roughly I think we could eliminate said nesting and at the same time review the string comparisons with something like: