On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 03:28, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 25 Mar 2003, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > > > Would this be a better fix for the devicetype problem? > > I may be blind here, but the only difference in your patch that > I see is some rewritten debug messages. What am I overlooking?
The second half of the patch? > > It looks like we are putting the strings into the buffer twice, and we > > are not returning the 'fixed' devicetype for both protocol levels (< NT1 > > and NT1). > > > > What happened here is that jermey 'fixed' a const warning. This meant > > that this 'in/out' buffer became an 'in' buffer, and we didn't push the > > correct devicetype back to the wire. > > > > Volker then tried to fix the specific case he hit. > > I could gripe about serious regressions here but I won't.... > Not so much aimed at any one in particular.... > > > > cheers, jerry > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Hewlett-Packard ------------------------- http://www.hp.com > SAMBA Team ---------------------- http://www.samba.org > GnuPG Key ---- http://www.plainjoe.org/gpg_public.asc > "You can never go home again, Oatman, but I guess you can shop there." > --John Cusack - "Grosse Point Blank" (1997) > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: For info see http://quantumlab.net/pine_privacy_guard/ > > iD8DBQE+gIPLIR7qMdg1EfYRAtthAKCKEVVXzUUcNlSfO1MbYo2cJhtZBACg7J+C > EyxqWrdm57jcnZRDtmUivTg= > =1ig+ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
