Re: [PATCH] ldap connection caching (not ready!!!)

2002-10-22 Thread Andrew Bartlett
Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote: Hi Andrew, here's the working version of my ldap connection chaching patch with looping (we retry after 0.5, 2, 4.5, 8, 12.5, 18, 24.5 seconds) Been very busy with assignments, but this patch looks good - but can you move the common code into a helper?

Re: [PATCH] ldap connection caching (not ready!!!)

2002-10-22 Thread Andrew Bartlett
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 But we want to add one - and I want it for non-unix accounts. What I propose is that we get the nextrid idea bedded down in non-unix accounts, then expand it from there when we figure out the other issues. I

Re: [PATCH] ldap connection caching (not ready!!!)

2002-10-18 Thread Stefan (metze) Metzmacher
A 'make clean' can do wonders... this was th efirst thing I do :-) In any case, what do you mean by 'HEAD works'? Is your patch against 3.0 + your passdb patch or .. ? I mean clean HEAD without my patch :-) On the patch - the 'wrapper' functions need to include a while loop. do {

Re: [PATCH] ldap connection caching (not ready!!!)

2002-10-18 Thread Stefan (metze) Metzmacher
At 21:30 17.10.2002 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +++ /home/vlendec/head/source/passdb/pdb_ldap.c Thu Oct 17 21:26:37 2002 @@ -1445,7 +1445,7 @@ } else { ldap_msgfree(result); } - return NT_STATUS_UNSUCCESSFUL; + return ret; } Hi Volker, thanks a

Re: [PATCH] ldap connection caching (not ready!!!)

2002-10-18 Thread Ignacio Coupeau
Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote: !!! a few line above I read 'return NT_STATUS_OK' but it was 'ret = NT_STATUS_OK' :-( but now it works! :-) what I need is to test is the non_unix_account stuff. I browsed the code and the ldap schema changes... if I don't misunderstand, the the nextrid is

Re: [PATCH] ldap connection caching (not ready!!!)

2002-10-18 Thread Stefan (metze) Metzmacher
At 10:30 18.10.2002 +0200, Ignacio Coupeau wrote: Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote: !!! a few line above I read 'return NT_STATUS_OK' but it was 'ret = NT_STATUS_OK' :-( but now it works! :-) what I need is to test is the non_unix_account stuff. Should this mail a responde to the id allocator

Re: [PATCH] ldap connection caching (not ready!!!)

2002-10-18 Thread Andrew Bartlett
Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote: At 10:30 18.10.2002 +0200, Ignacio Coupeau wrote: Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote: !!! a few line above I read 'return NT_STATUS_OK' but it was 'ret = NT_STATUS_OK' :-( but now it works! :-) what I need is to test is the non_unix_account stuff. Should

[PATCH] ldap connection caching (not ready!!!)

2002-10-17 Thread Stefan (metze) Metzmacher
Hi Andrew, here's the NOT READY version of my ldap connection chaching patch metze - Stefan metze Metzmacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] diff -Npur --exclude=CVS --exclude=*.bak --exclude=*.o --exclude=*.po --exclude=.#*

Re: [PATCH] ldap connection caching (not ready!!!)

2002-10-17 Thread Andrew Bartlett
Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote: Hi Andrew, here's the next NOT WORKING version of my ldap connection chaching patch there's a problem with the LM and NT passwords. I've got the following errors??? Can anybody test it I can't find the bug :-( I'm sitting here for hours now... btw