On Feb 23, 2006, at 4:41 PM, Achim Grolms wrote:
On Thursday 23 February 2006 21:40, Simon Wilkinson wrote:
Achim,
I'm having some trouble understanding the requirements for these
changes.
Simon has a better handle on GSSAPI than I, so I will leave most
decisions to him.
Also, there seem to be a lot of purely formatting changes, which
make it
harder to see where the functional differences lie.
That was my initial reaction too. You may or may not agree with the
style, but
whenever editing someone elses code I think it is always best to
attempt to
follow their style as much as possible. I admit though sometimes it
is not
always possible to figure out someone elses style :-)
+ if ( $status->major == GSS_S_COMPLETE ) {
+ $self->{gss_ctx} = new GSSAPI::Context;
+ $self->{gss_state} = 0;
- $self->{gss_name} = new GSSAPI::Name;
- $status = $self->{gss_name}->import($self->{gss_name},
$principal,
- gss_nt_service_name)
- or return $self->set_error("GSSAPI Error : ".$status);
I believe that the existing code provides sufficient error
checking on
the return from import().
Yes.
but the ->import() method has to be used as Class method like
GSSAPI::Name->import( target,
principal,
gss_nt_service_name )
Calling import directly does not seem a good thing to do to me. Can
someone explain why we are doing that ?
I don't think that we should be die()ing from the middle of the SASL
library,
Correct.
I have written in alle my Emails that the 'die' has to be replaced
with somthing better before commiting it to the SVN.
The 'die' was only for my testing.
Yes, we need to provide a way for the user to get back any error
information.
Graham.
