[PATCHES] remove s4member tests, was Re: ctdb in autobuild broken -- ctdb depends on winbind now????

[Rowland Penny]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:16:25 +0100
Michael Adam <obnox at samba.org> wrote:

> On 2017-01-10 at 16:54 +0000, Rowland Penny wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:35:53 +0100
> > Stefan Metzmacher <metze at samba.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Rowland,
> > > 
> > > >>> So, I will ask again, why are we testing against something we
> > > >>> tell users not to use and is actually broken ???
> > > >>
> > > >> Agreed. Let's remove it...
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers - Michael
> > > > 
> > > > OK, the attached patches should remove the s4member tests from
> > > > Samba, so start objecting now LOL
> > > > 
> > > > If I have missed anything, please let me know ;-)
> > > 
> > > I'd prefer that you don't remove tests completely, they should
> > > be moved to another environment if they're only run against
> > > s4member. We should either use ad_member or rpc_proxy.
> > 
> > They are mostly run against other environments, but I take your
> > point.
> > 
> > I take it that these tests date back to the early days off Samba4
> > and at that time it was thought that provisioning a Samba member
> > server was the way to go. If Samba isn't going to recommend
> > provisioning a member server and actually goes out of its way to
> > tell people not to do this, then any tests against a provisioned
> > member server are, in my opinion, about as much use as a chocolate
> > fireguard ;-)
> > 
> > > 
> > > I'd also like to get some comments from Andrew before this
> > > gets pushed.
> > 
> > Like I said (in a roundabout way), if the patches needs altering,
> > lets alter them, but I still think the useless s4member tests need
> > to go.
> 
> I think what Metze refers to is those (very few) testsuites
> that are only planned against this environment.  These are:
> 
> - samba4.smb.signing on with %s local-creds

Ok, what env do you suggest ?

> - samba4.winbind.dom_name_parse.cmd

The only place I can remember 'samba4.winbind' is in the known fail
file and if the test isn't there any more then it wont fail, or are
you referring to something else ?

Rowland