[PATCH] Restore recursive search, with tests!

Garming Sam garming at catalyst.net.nz
Mon Jan 18 01:25:29 UTC 2016

Hi Adrian,

In the patch:

ldb-samba: Correct error reporting to match Windows

You've assigned 0 into the 'matched' variable, as opposed to false. 
Besides being consistent with the rest of the file, this should be the 
normal convention.

Apart from that, it looks good with all the new testing and you may mark 
my review on it.

The only other thing is to comment on how long these searches take and 
whether or not it may be improved but this seems like something to 
ponder on at a later date.



On 13/01/16 13:56, adrianc at catalyst.net.nz wrote:
> Sorry, the last set of patches had extraneous whitespace I've now 
> removed.
> On 2016-01-13 11:28, adrianc at catalyst.net.nz wrote:
>> Here's the improved patches. I've now broken them down a bit more and
>> found the source of the incorrect error reporting. Turns out the fault
>> was in the new recursive search patches I was testing.
>> On 2016-01-07 17:25, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 16:02 +1300, adrianc at catalyst.net.nz wrote:
>>>> These patches will:
>>>> * restore recursive search to the LDB extension modules
>>>> * adds tests to the original patch
>>>> * and brings LDB more in line with Windows behavior.
>>>> Please review, thanks.
>>> Thanks Adrian.
>>> Per our chat in the office, we need to separate out some of the
>>> patches, and not override the failures from ldb_search_full
>>> unconditionally.
>>> That said, I do really appreciate your patience and persistence getting
>>> this patch back ready for master.  It was unfortunate that we had to
>>> drop it just before 4.3, and so I hope it can make it back for 4.4.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Andrew Bartlett

More information about the samba-technical mailing list