[PATCH] Fix the build

[Jeremy Allison]

On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 09:21:42AM +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 09:34:49 +0200
> Volker Lendecke <vl at samba.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi!
> > 
> > Review appreciated!
> > 
> > Looking at commit 1c636532874da from a few weeks ago I begin to
> > question the value of our README.Coding file. I've asked a few times
> > to fix patches to follow the 80-column rule, I even provided patches
> > to assist.
> > 
> > There's a reason why we have this rule: It's not that we are all
> > sitting at 3270 or vt100 terminals. We want to avoid arbitrarily
> > deeply nested control structures. It might be more work, but
> > well-named factored out subfunctions foster unterstanding of complex
> > code. Looking at dsdb_garbage_collect_tombstones(), we have four
> > (!!)  levels of nested for-loops. One line I've just come across
> > almost touches twice the 80-columns with its length of 157 chars.
> > 
> > So, shall we drop the README.Coding section on 80 chars, as it is not
> > generally seen as worthwhile following?
> > 
> > Volker
> 
> Hi Volker, No, but you could fix the link to PEP8, it now seems to be at:
> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/
> 
> Until you raised this, I didn't know about README.Coding, nobody told
> me, perhaps this is one reason why the 80 columns rule gets broken.

Ah that's just the Samba way Rowland. You break the rules and
then someone complains about it and then you find the rule existed.

Been working well for *years* :-).