[SCM] Samba Shared Repository - branch master updated
mat+Informatique.Samba at matws.net
Tue Jan 12 10:32:58 MST 2010
On 12/01/2010 20:02, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer wrote:
> Hi Matthieu,
> as you obviously didn't notice you can't find the differences at the
> moment. This is because tridge reverted the modifications in
> "provision_users.ldif" for now. This was due to a failing torture test
> in "make test" which wasn't fixed.
For some reason a simple git reset --hard to your last commit on
upgradeprovision didn't do the trick I had to rebuild to see those
change appearing !
> So my apologies, you have to wait. I will recheckin the patches first,
> in a more clear manner (since the last time the diff's were indeed very
> hard to read - I forgot to control them and noticed this only later) and
> second, when the torture suite also works against them.
> Regarding the correction of the "upgradeprovision" script: I find this
> very good. I introduced it since previously we had no real mechanism for
> linked-attribute dependency resolving. Therefore I would really like to
> let this in. Obviously, this doesn't fix the other issue with the wrong
> "groupType"s (but I think we should work on this after the mentioned
> "provision_users.ldif" changes - since now you can't notice them).
Well I didn't like it like that ! I still find the idea of multiple
commit not a good one !
Please have a look at the patchs attached to this email (especialy the
last one which is implementing a, ihmo, cleaner way to reorder object
depending on others).
For the grouptype "pb" it's fixed in 1st patch.
This patch set also add the proper upgrading of object wrongly put in
CN=Users (this will be effective when you will rework your patchs).
Needless to say that with this set of patch upgradeprovision is able to
upgrade properly an alpha10 provision with your patches (that were
reverted then by tridge) and without.
This set of patch a built upon the fact that the changeset
2cedefabc93c8a1fcb49d65a3f78a344e814f826 is reverted.
Andrew: can you give me your comments on those patches ?
> Matthieu Patou wrote:
>> Hello Mathias,
>> I'm not too pleased with this change as it tends to commit stuff
>> partially instead of one together once we are sure that everything was
>> (correctly) added at least with this way of doing we are sure that
>> once that the commit is done all the schema or all the partitions has
>> been updated and that the whole thing is relatively coherent.
>> Also apart from the groupType that we talk last sunday on irc, you
>> told me that some object where misplaced but when I do an
>> upgradeprovision against a alpha10 provision and I only found those 2
>> * CN=dns,CN=Users,DC=home,DC=matws,DC=net exist but with the wrong
>> * CN=RID Set,CN=ARES,OU=Domain Controllers,DC=home,DC=matws,DC=net
>> Where are the other problem that you faced ?
More information about the samba-technical