shadow_copy3? Or replace 2?

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at
Wed Jun 15 06:53:56 MDT 2011

On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 13:34 +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> Hi!
> Attached find a shadow_copy3 module that is supposed to do
> everything shadow_copy2 does. In the last few years, we have
> had to fix various issues with the shadow_copy2 code and
> believe me, this was not the most pleasant excercise. Thus
> I have started from scratch, in particular I've worked
> without all the macros. This makes the code a bit larger,
> but you have a chance to step through it with a debugger.
> What I would like to do is to completely replace
> shadow_copy2 with this new code. There is a risk that this
> looses functionality or behaves slightly differently, but
> all of this should be fixable. Certainly I would rename all
> shadow_copy3 artifacts to shadow_copy2 when doing that move.
> I really, really want to avoid having to maintain
> shadow_copy2 any further.

I don't see why we should attempt to maintain code that an experienced
developer such as yourself decides is so unmaintainable that it drove
you to write a complete replacement. 

I'm a big advocate of doing things right, rather than trying to keep up
minimal changes forever, so you have my +1 on the concept.  

(I don't know this particular code-base very well however)

Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett                      
Authentication Developer, Samba Team 

More information about the samba-technical mailing list