Problems creating a Kerberos test (sw_gethostbyname?)

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at samba.org
Wed Feb 15 02:25:44 GMT 2006


On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 13:16 +1100, tridge at samba.org wrote:
> Andrew,
> 
>  > I was talking with Jay Fenlason (RedHat maintainer) about testing, and
>  > he has a problem that he wants to run testsuites for QA, but that these
>  > tests must be done on the production binaries (a standard requirement at
>  > RedHat apparently).
>  > 
>  > Is it possible for the socketwrapper code to be used as an LD_PRELOAD,
>  > to allow this kind of 'final binary' testing (of the built RPMS)?  I
>  > realise as soon as you add/remove LD_PRELOAD you invalidate some of the
>  > testing, but I wonder if there were any other barriers to this approach?
> 
> socketwrapper is already designed so you can run it in production, and
> it enables itself only when an environment variable is set. 

Sure, but if you were RedHat (or any other vendor) would you ship binary
RPMs with this enabled?

> I haven't
> measured the performance cost of having it there when not used, but I
> expect it to be quite small. It would be worth measuring.
> 
> I think preloads are not the right approach for this testing, but to
> answer your specific question, yes, you could easily rejig
> socketwrapper as a preload. I just don't think we should do that for
> Samba testing.

OK.

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Student Network Administrator, Hawker College  http://hawkerc.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20060215/3567a796/attachment.bin


More information about the samba-technical mailing list