----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Bartlett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 1:42 PM
> > Yup, I can try and update it to current CVS, as long as that doesn't change to
>often ;-)
> > I'll hopefully be able to do it soon. Should I send the next version of the patch
>via list again,
> > or are there concerns about too many "big" mails?
>
> I'm not too fussed. Netscape doesn't really like it in the reply pane,
> but thats just my problem. Breaking the patch down often helps. I
> wonder if you would be able to abstract some of the repeditive code (you
> have code duplicated right down the file, doing the same thing to
> different functions) into a helper function.
Here comes the next version of the patch then. It's against today's CVS and
has hopefully all style concerns corrected. I've also tried to factor out some of
the repetitive code into a helper function, but because they are all only short
repetitive code parts, it did not help much.
> > Neither should that. If I find any 'if(' that were there before, should I change
>them as well?
>
> I won't object :-)
I've decided not to change all occurrences of 'if(' to 'if (' in srv_samr_nt.c as that
would have made the patch unnecessary big and less well readable.
> > Is that supposed to be a addition or a replacement to the checks done in this
>patch?
>
> Just letting you know where we are heading. The current patch is the
> correct solution for the current situation. It allows for the next work
> to be done easiliy, and I thank you for that.
:)
> Andrew Bartlett
>
> --
> Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Student Network Administrator, Hawker College [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net
>
Kai
access_bits.patch
Description: Binary data
srv_samr_nt.patch
Description: Binary data
