a few cleanup patches

[Volker Lendecke]

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:50:24PM +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 12:43:00PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 08:57:41PM +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:56:22AM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > > > No, I don't think we need to do that. I think this is the
> > > > only issue that was missed, the rest of the code looks
> > > > good - and as I say I really want to get rid of that
> > > > horrible INTERNAL_OPEN_ONLY long term as it leads to
> > > > mistakes :-(. As you know I'm a little busy with something
> > > > else at the moment :-) else I'd be making it a higher priority.
> > > > 
> > > > Just review and push if you agree !
> > > 
> > > We 100% need tests for this. This code is so freaking tricky
> > > that we can't let anything controversial in without full
> > > test coverage. Please push the reverts of the two
> > > controversial patches.
> > 
> > Sure, we need tests I agree. I don't think we have
> > any tests for the nasty INTERNAL_OPEN_ONLY code
> > path other than if the xattr set fails on the
> > file attributes set :-(.
> > 
> > The old printing code uses it to check driver
> > file versions (it shouldn't) and the completely
> > unused SMB1 file_copy code also seems to use it.
> > Oh yeah, and the get/set file security RPCs
> > used by Win9x clients uses it (again, it shouldn't).
> > 
> > Once I've got some more free time I will eradicate
> > this pest from our code base once and for all :-).
> > 
> > But yeah, testing right now would be nice..
> 
> Until then, please push the revert.

Ping? Many hours later and no revert pushed?

Volker

-- 
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de