URL: https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/235
Title: #235: Allow using the "shortnames" feature without requiring any 
configuration from the client side

fidencio commented:
"""
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 2:12 PM, lslebodn <[email protected]> wrote:

> On (18/04/17 03:47), fidencio wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 11:33 AM, lslebodn <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Removing unit test is not acceptable without writing new one.
> >>
> >
> >Lukáš,
> >
> >Maybe I wasn't clear enough in the "NSS/TESTS: Improve non-fqnames tests"
> >commit message.
> >
> >I do NOT remove any test per si.
> >The situation before was:
> >- I was using the very same setup() function and setting
> subdomain->fqnames
> >
> Then it would be good to have common_setup function
> or call one setup function from another + additional modifications.
>
> >The current situation is:
> >- Now I set subdomain->fqnames = false in the newly introduced setup()
> >function, which allows me to use the tests from where I copied, pasted and
> >changed the code to set subdomain->fqnames = false.
> >
>
> It is not just about `subdomain->fqnames = false`
> There are more changes between `test_nss_getgrnam_members_subdom`
> and `test_nss_getgrnam_members_subdom`.
>
> ```
> -void test_nss_getgrnam_members_subdom(void **state)
> +void test_nss_getgrnam_members_subdom_nonfqnames(void **state)
> {
> errno_t ret;
>
> - mock_input_user_or_group("testsubdomgroup@"TEST_SUBDOM_NAME);
> + nss_test_ctx->subdom->fqnames = false;
> +
> + mock_input_user_or_group("testsubdomgroup");
> + mock_account_recv_simple();
> will_return(__wrap_sss_packet_get_cmd, SSS_NSS_GETGRNAM);
> will_return_always(__wrap_sss_packet_get_body, WRAP_CALL_REAL);
> ```
>
> And you removed valid test case without equivalent replacement.
>


Now I've seen what I did wrong. :-)

"""

See the full comment at 
https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/235#issuecomment-294828423
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to