RFC: new testparam check

[David Disseldorp]

Thanks for the quick follow up, Noel. One question...

On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 20:32:52 +0100, Noel Power wrote:

> Testing 'name resolve order' with 'aribrary' values fails (because now
> we check the validity of the values) so we need to add this param to
> the list of exceptions when testing
> 
> Bug: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12739
> Signed-off-by: Noel Power <noel.power at suse.com>
> ---
>  python/samba/tests/docs.py | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/python/samba/tests/docs.py b/python/samba/tests/docs.py
> index 65df573a350..202619a913e 100644
> --- a/python/samba/tests/docs.py
> +++ b/python/samba/tests/docs.py
> @@ -163,7 +163,8 @@ class SmbDotConfTests(TestCase):
>                            'client plaintext auth',
>                            'registry shares',
>                            'smb ports',
> -                          'rpc server dynamic port range'])
> +                          'rpc server dynamic port range',
> +                          'name resolve order'])
>          self._test_empty(['bin/testparm'])
>  
>      def test_default_s4(self):
> @@ -171,7 +172,8 @@ class SmbDotConfTests(TestCase):
>          self._set_defaults(['bin/samba-tool', 'testparm'])
>          self._set_arbitrary(['bin/samba-tool', 'testparm'],
>              exceptions = ['smb ports',
> -                          'rpc server dynamic port range'])
> +                          'rpc server dynamic port range',
> +                          'name resolve order'])
>          self._test_empty(['bin/samba-tool', 'testparm'])

Is the 'samba-tool testparm' exception necessary? I would have expected
this to be source3 testparm only.

Squashing this into the 0002 does make sense.

Cheers, David