[PATCH] More tdb/ldb tests.

[Adrian Cochrane]

I looked into removing the use of ldb_private.h but the problem is it 
contains the very routines (ldb_unpack_data) that I want to test. To me 
the options on the private header seem to be either to move those 
routines to be declared in the public header to be tested or to keep 
the private header inclusion in the tests. There may be other solutions 
and I don't know which is nicer.

Furthermore I would consider fixing the SDDL translation a separate job 
and I'm not sure how to do it.

On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Stefan Metzmacher <metze at samba.org> 
wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
> 
>>  On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 12:52 +1200, Adrian Cochrane wrote:
>>>  This one took me a bit but this expands test coverage of tdb.
>> 
>>  Thanks Adrian.  I really appriciate your efforts to lock in the
>>  ldb_unpack_data behaviour.
>> 
>>  As you know, the next steps are to incorporate the
>>  ldb_unpack_data_withlist patches from Matthieu, and then test those.
>> 
>>  However, first I need you to fix up a few things.  Please read
>>  README.Coding.  In particular please fix up the comments and use 8
>>  -space tabs for indentation.
>> 
>>  For the ntSecurityDescriptor skip:
>>   - In the comment, explain that it can't round-trip via the SDDL 
>> string
>>  (that's what the line-noise like string starting with O: is)
>>   - Please don't just write 'Skipping' as the output, either remove 
>> the
>>  torture_comment or make it more meaningful.  I would prefer it 
>> removed
>>  as it will happen every time in normal behaviour.
> 
> Would it be possible to check if it's possible to fix the SDDL 
> translation
> to avoid losing information?
> 
> metze
>