Installing exchange 2010 with samba DCs

[Matthieu Patou]

On 05/20/2012 01:52 PM, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer wrote:
> Hi Matthieu,
>
> the patch seems to be fine in general.
>> +                       if (ret != LDB_SUCCESS) {
>> +                               return ldb_msg_copy_attr(msg, 
>> "whenChanged", "modifyTimeStamp");
>> +                       }
>> +
>> +                       if (res->count != 1) {
>> +                               return ldb_msg_copy_attr(msg, 
>> "whenChanged", "modifyTimeStamp");
>> +                       }
>> +
>> +                       value = discard_const_p(struct ldb_val, 
>> ldb_msg_find_ldb_val(res->msgs[0], "whenChanged"));
>> +                       if (!value) {
>> +                               return ldb_msg_copy_attr(msg, 
>> "whenChanged", "modifyTimeStamp");
>> +                       }
> Do we need the "ldb_msg_copy_attr" on each failure case? If not we 
> should either return "ret" in the first case and otherwise bail out 
> using "ldb_operr(ldb)".
I wasn't sure that the function called for the replacement could fail, 
hence the try to return always something.
I'll update the patch to have clearer error.

Thanks.

Matthieu.
>
> Matthias
>
> Matthieu Patou schrieb:
>> But my request was for the latest patch the one that change the 
>> behavior of the operational module and especially how modifyTimestamp 
>> is handled.
>> In my trial to make exchange 2010 install on top of a S4 DC it was 
>> failing with some strange error. Research on internet yielded tips 
>> about clock synchronization influencing the timestamp of the schema's 
>> cache that the "exchange" server is maintaining. After checking the 
>> windows behavior I came to the conclusion that the modifyTimestamp on 
>> the CN=Aggregate object reflects the timestamp of the most recently 
>> modified object in the schema, hence my patch.
>>
>> Can you check this particular one ?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Matthieu


-- 
Matthieu Patou
Samba Team
http://samba.org