[PATCH] SYSVOL ACL fixes Re: [PATCH] Fix 'samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck' failures and remove NT4 compat
Stefan (metze) Metzmacher
metze at samba.org
Wed Nov 14 08:06:01 MST 2012
> On Wed, 2012-11-14 at 10:40 +0200, Tadas wrote:
>> Could you make those patches for rc5 or should they apply cleanly? Then I
>> could test them on my main deployment and not on testing deployment with
>> only few machines.
>> I really want to see GPO's fixed :)
> The attached (large) series of patches are all the ACL-related fixes
> that are not yet in 4.0.
I maintain a branch
which is identical to master (except for VERSION and WHATSNEW.txt),
where I git cherry-pick -x all changes from origin/master
and rebase on origin/v4-0-test.
When I'm getting conflicts during the rebase on origin/v4-0-test
I typically skip (git rebase --skip) because they're already
in origin/v4-0-test. At the end I compare my v4-0-test to origin/master
and the diff should only show VERSION and WHATSNEW.txt.
But if I do rebase on origin/v4-0-test + your patchset,
I'm getting a larger diff against origin/master.
This means the patchset is incomplete.
> They may not all be strictly required (some are tests), and we may
> decide not to do the mem_ctx changes, but this lot builds and passes the
> automated tests here.
I think we should keep the diff in that area zero to prevent backporting
I think we should backport all vfs/acl changes from master to v4-0-test
including all tests and tools.
I already noticed that the commit from v4-0-test
"Fix bug 9376 - ensure_canon_entry_valid generates duplicate
SMB_ACL_GROUP, acl_valid fails."
was a different change compared to
s3:smbd: Fix typo in got_duplicate_group check
We should really try to avoid that as it makes the overhead of backporting
and auditing the missing backports much harder.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 259 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the samba-technical