From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3811564BB0
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  4 Mar 2022 11:32:07 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2EB372E34
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  4 Mar 2022 11:32:07 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id BDB972E28
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  4 Mar 2022 11:32:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9054446EA9
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  4 Mar 2022 11:32:06 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <b1917d87-180e-ff1a-0e1a-ae2cd2e16d51@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 11:32:05 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.6.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20211029111624.142116-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <20211029111624.142116-3-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <41faad7c-490f-0ba4-21b7-ea29cb6b79d9@proxmox.com>
From: Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <41faad7c-490f-0ba4-21b7-ea29cb6b79d9@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.128 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC v2 container 1/1] print_ct_warn_log: use
 log_warn function from RESTEnvironment
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2022 10:32:07 -0000

Am 04.03.22 um 11:25 schrieb Thomas Lamprecht:
> On 29/10/2021 13:16, Fabian Ebner wrote:
>> No functional change is intended.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
>> ---
>>
>> No changes from v1.
>>
>> Dependency bump for pve-common is needed.
> 
> not any more though, or at least never for the other patch in this series?
> As you do not import the symbol here locally anyway, but always use the full
> module path..

But the function itself only exists after the first patch of the series.

> 
>> +	PVE::RESTEnvironment::log_warn($1);
>