[SAMBA4] Python Status

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 01:06 +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> The support for Python I have been working on for some time now
> is now getting close to completion. Provisioning using the 
> Python code works now and is being tested. "make test" still uses 
> the EJS provision to set up the dc and domain member. 
> 
> To try out the Python provision code with make test, export 
> "PROVISION_PYTHON=yes". Note that this won't show anything different as the 
> EJS and Python provisioning scripts do exactly the same thing.

I get:

PROVISIONING MEMBER...schema_fsmo_init: no schema dn present: (skip
schema loading)
naming_fsmo_init: no partitions dn present: (skip loading of naming
contexts details)
pdc_fsmo_init: no domain dn present: (skip loading of domain details)
schema_fsmo_init: no schema head present: (skip schema loading)
naming_fsmo_init: no partitions dn present: (skip loading of naming
contexts details)
pdc_fsmo_init: no domain object present: (skip loading of domain
details)

I think you should also test the LDAP mode:
PROVISION_PYTHON=yes TEST_LDAP=yes OPENLDAP_ROOT=/data/openldap/prefix
make testenv

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "./setup/provision.py", line 137, in <module>
    if not opts.ldap_module:
AttributeError: Values instance has no attribute 'ldap_module'

> All of the Python bindings and functions, except for the ones in 
> samba.samba3.upgrade, have matching tests.

Is there anything particular getting in the way of upgrade tests, aside
from time?

> There are a couple of hosts on the build farm that do not 
> have Python installed yet (3 if I remember correctly). I will follow
> up on this later.
> 
> The following things also still need to be finished before Python can
> provide everything that EJS provides right now:
> 
> * DCE/RPC bindings: There are no Python bindings generated by pidl
>   yet. This is probably the biggest thing at the moment.

Should we have DCE/RPC bindings, or libnet bindings?  While it's more
work to provide sane APIs, perhaps that is more at the level python
programmers want?

(I actually suspect they want both). 

> * dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/tests/samba3sam.py doesn't pass yet (port of
>  ../testprogs/samba3sam.js)
> * lib/ldb/tests/python/ldap.py doesn't pass yet (port of 
>   ../testprogs/ejs/ldap.js)
> * Install python modules into system. At the moment only the smbpython
>   binary is installed, but it would be nice if "ordinary" Python users 
>   could also use the Samba python modules.
> * SWAT: The web server code still uses EJS. We could probably postpone
>   this until after the switch to Python.

I would at least like to see a command-line way to vampire a server
before we killed SWAT (as there isn't another way to do it in one
spot). 

> However, I'm interested in feedback on the Python code at this point. I
> will continue working on finishing the support for Python (hopefully done by 
> the first week of the new year..). And I will of course send a
> merge request once I'm actually done...

I don't like the way we no longer use a global dictionary for the
substitutions.  I would prefer to have all subs available in all files,
if possible.

This pattern:

    setup_add_ldif(samdb, setup_path("provision_rootdse_add.ldif"), {
        "SCHEMADN": schemadn, 
        "NETBIOSNAME": netbiosname,
        "DNSDOMAIN": dnsdomain,
        "DEFAULTSITE": DEFAULTSITE,
        "REALM": realm,

Seems to defeat the purpose of having these consistent subs in the first
place...

Thanks,

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.                  http://redhat.com

-------------- 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/20071228/c5add5de/attachment.bin