[SCM] Samba Shared Repository - branch master updated

[Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer]

Hi Jelmer,

first this patch originally wasn't by me - I've only integrated it. But 
it is really bad style to use such "manual" testing code? And there are 
some more places where this is used - always in the same file.

Cheers,
Matthias

Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 19:15 +0200, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer wrote:
>    
>> @@ -173,11 +174,19 @@ testit "wbinfo -D against $TARGET" $wbinfo -D $DOMAIN || failed=`expr $failed +
>>
>>   testit "wbinfo -i against $TARGET" $wbinfo -i "$DOMAIN/$USERNAME" || failed=`expr $failed + 1`
>>
>> -testit "wbinfo --uid-info against $TARGET" $wbinfo --uid-info $admin_uid
>> +testit "wbinfo --uid-info against $TARGET" $wbinfo --uid-info $admin_uid || failed=`expr $failed + 1`
>>
>> -# this does not work
>> -knownfail "wbinfo --group-info against $TARGET" $wbinfo --group-info "S-1-22-2-0"
>> -knownfail "wbinfo --gid-info against $TARGET" $wbinfo --gid-info 30001
>> +echo "test: wbinfo --group-info against $TARGET"
>> +rawgid=`$wbinfo --group-info "Domain admins" | sed 's/.*:\([0-9][0-9]*\):/\1/'`
>> +if test x$? = x0; then
>> +	echo "success: wbinfo --group-info against $TARGET"
>> +else
>> +	echo "failure: wbinfo --group-info against $TARGET"
>> +	failed=`expr $failed + 1`
>> +fi
>>      
> Is there any reason for manually printing here rather than using the
> testit function?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jelmer
>
>