Re: [PATCH] winbind id assignment module
Mike Gerdts wrote: On Sat, 2002-05-18 at 20:05, Andrew Bartlett wrote: I don't think I actually looked at the code for the first patch, only the comments. Unless a patch is *really* big (in which case you should consider why this is the case) you would do well to always include the patch an either an inline or attached diff, not as a tarball. I am confused on list etiquette... I thought that samba-technical was one that everyone complained about attachments 'cause it screwed up the -digest version. They complain about binary attachments, and html mail. Patches havn't caused an issue as far as I know. Works best if you can convince your mailer to attach it (as yours did) in a 'text/...' format, as then it doesn't get encoded etc. The patch and a sample module are attached. The tarball also includes a readme, changelog, and a Makefile. This looks *much* better. I'm not sure on the 'reload' functionality, but I suppose its a good idea. Other than minor things like indenting, (Try 8-space tabs) I think this is well on its way to inclusion. I like the checking of the .so at loadparm time - its a nice touch. 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
Re: [PATCH] winbind id assignment module
On Sat, 2002-05-18 at 20:54, Andrew Bartlett wrote: This looks *much* better. I'm not sure on the 'reload' functionality, but I suppose its a good idea. Other than minor things like indenting, (Try 8-space tabs) I think this is well on its way to inclusion. The reload functionality was initially intended to be only load(). My initial look at the existing code suggested that it would get called again after getting a HUP (I have to look into that though...). To me it looked as though it would be easiest just to make it be able to handle a reload. I think that it should work as it is, but I haven't tested it. The two things that I would want to test are 1) does it do what you expect, and 2) does it free up all resources related to the file such that someone debugging a module can count on a day of HUPs rather than restarts does end up with 50 copies still mapped. As for spacing... I tried to follow the standard that I saw in the file already. I used 4 character tabs, but they should have expanded out OK. I thought that others were using 4 character tabs as well because sections of winbindd_idmap.c have tabs expanded to four characters. In any case, the next version that goes out will get rid of any expanded tabs and any necessary reformatting for prettiness will take place. I like the checking of the .so at loadparm time - its a nice touch. Thanks! Mike
