wild use of strlcpy() broke ipv6 support

Matthieu Patou mat at samba.org
Mon Apr 2 11:24:35 MDT 2012

On 04/02/2012 05:02 AM, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> Am 02/04/12 05:01, schrieb Matthieu Patou:
>> Hi Jelmer,
>>> I'm thinking of having one instance of samba in make test with
>>> interface + bind interface only combo set so that we can catch this
>>> problem in the future.
>>> That might be useful, the first step really should be to have more unit
>>> tests for these parts of the code with IPv6.
>>> Increasing the number of environments that the testsuite runs against
>>> doesn't scale well, we should really try to avoid that if we at all can.
>> I was more thinking about converting one of the existing env to have
>> this, like fl2003.
> I think we should approach this in a more structural way. Just switching
> fl2003 over doesn't actually test that IPv6 works, or that all
> IPv6-related code is exercised. It also means that if the fl2003 tests
> fail we don't know why that is - the IPv6 code or the actual fl2003 code.
> High-level functional tests are useful, but they're fairly expensive and
> they aren't a replacement for proper unit testing.
It's not completely IPv6 test, as you need to be in a configuration 
where you bind to a specific set of interface to trigger this.
So yes unit tests are better but I'm not in the mood to do them right 
now, instead tweaking 1 or 2 envs to make them bind on a specific set of 
interfaces is a much more quicker solution that will avoid breakage in 
the future.

There is also the option of doing nothing but I don't think it's a good 
idea but let me know what is prefered.


Matthieu Patou
Samba Team

More information about the samba-technical mailing list