[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 13:45:19 MST 2012

Am 14.11.2012 21:14, schrieb Andrew Bartlett:
> On Wed, 2012-11-14 at 16:06 +0100, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>>> 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
>> https://gitweb.samba.org/?p=metze/samba/wip.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/v4-0-test
>> 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.
> Can you give me more details than that?
> That patch set was the best I could figure out trying to pick out
> patches, but if you have more information then we can work together to
> provide a correct set. 
> It does have the additional changes I was waiting for review on from
> yesterday.
>>> 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
>> nightmares
>> in future.
>> I think we should backport all vfs/acl changes from master to v4-0-test
>> including all tests and tools.
> I agree.
>> 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."
>> https://gitweb.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=e122c7d24b10119c9ea4d65e0099ff1690394457
>> was a different change compared to
>> s3:smbd: Fix typo in got_duplicate_group check
>> https://gitweb.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=c06d602d7f3b8d3da972071a1b5392c6b145133f
>> We should really try to avoid that as it makes the overhead of backporting
>> and auditing the missing backports much harder.
> Indeed.
> As you have a script for it, I'm hoping we can also make the patch out
> of cherry-picked changes, so we keep the git reference between the
> branches in the message.  

Yes, I try to create a patchset for v4-0-test...


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 259 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20121114/9dba7ff0/attachment.pgp>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list