==> Regarding Re: [autofs] [ANNOUNCE] autofs 5.0.0 beta2; Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> adds:
raven> On Sat, 2006-05-27 at 16:13 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: >> On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 18:56 -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: > Guillaume.Rousse> >> Third, the following patches still apply, but I got no > >> Guillaume.Rousse> clue about their usefulness: - >> > >> > Guillaume.Rousse> autofs-4.1.0-hesiod-bind.patch >> > >> > jmoyer> I'll do some digging on this one tomorrow. >> > >> > OK, it took me a while longer than expected to get to this. Sorry! >> > >> > The hesiod resolve patch is wanted. Actually, I think in v5 we can >> just > get rid of the old calls to hes_resolve. >> > >> > If you look at the implementation that currently is there in >> lookup_hesiod.c, > it has some bugs. It will free a pointer that the >> library will > subsequently try to free, and it also leaks memory. This >> is, in part, due to > the horrible definition of the interface at the >> time, I believe. >> > >> > At any rate, we should move to hesiod_init, hesiod_resolve, etc. It's >> > probably best to check that the hesiod library supports the new >> interfaces > at configure time. If not, just disable the building of >> the hesiod > modules. >> > >> > Ian, let me know what you think of the attached patch. >> > >> >> I've checked this out and ended up with this, the configure part is due >> to the change in configure.in: >> raven> Oops and this. Yeah, with the added unlock this looks good. Thanks, Jeff _______________________________________________ autofs mailing list [email protected] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
