[Samba] Problem after update version 4.15.0

[Andrew Bartlett]

That's a very strange commit to have broken it, but try on master:

git revert 997fbcbc902

If that builds and works, then we have a simple workaround while we ask
Günther and Alexander for help as that is:
 
commit 997fbcbc902d945eb5261ddc6667f830fbcd5931
Author: Günther Deschner <gd at samba.org>
Date:   Sat Feb 13 22:11:52 2021 +0100

    s3-dsgetdcname: return dcinfo also when delivering from the cache.
    
    Guenther
    
    Signed-off-by: Guenther Deschner <gd at samba.org>
    Reviewed-by: Alexander Bokovoy <ab at samba.org>

But do tripple-check, by manually confirming that commit 'git
checkout 997fbcbc902' and the one before 'git checkout 997fbcbc902^'.

Thanks!

On Wed, 2021-10-13 at 20:46 +0200, Ingo Asche wrote:
> Hi Andrew, Hi Rowland,
> 
> found a bad one: 4.15.0pre1-GIT-997fbcbc902
> 
> After installing this one login failed. How should I proceed?
> 
> Regards
> Ingo
> 
> Andrew Bartlett schrieb am 13.10.2021 um 00:56:
> > On Wed, 2021-10-13 at 10:47 +1300, Andrew Bartlett via samba wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2021-10-12 at 21:24 +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2021-10-12 at 22:13 +0200, Ingo Asche wrote:
> > > > > Hi Rowland,
> > > > > 
> > > > > I asked Andrew the same, here's what he answered:
> > > > > 
> > > > > - Yes, you start from 4.14.0rc1 as this is the branch point
> > > > > where
> > > > > master
> > > > > - split into 4.14 (working) and what would eventually be
> > > > > 4.15.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Ingo
> > > > > 
> > > > Well, no one has complained about 4.14.x version, the problem
> > > > only
> > > > seems to exist on 4.15.0 (and I cannot get the problem to not
> > > > work
> > > > for
> > > > myself), so surely it is something in 4.15.0. I await Andrew
> > > > commenting
> > > > on this. If you do have to start from 4.14.0rc1, then you are
> > > > going
> > > > to
> > > > be at it for sometime.
> > > G'Day Rowland,
> > > 
> > > A bisect does a binary search, so even across large version gaps
> > > it
> > > the
> > > increased workload in testing is minimal.  That is why we use
> > > that
> > > approach, rather than (say) linearly selecting all commits.
> > > 
> > > It is exceedingly unlikely the issue was introduced after
> > > 4.15.0rc1,
> > > so
> > > we must start before that.  The correct spot to start is
> > > 4.14.0rc1 as
> > > discussed, master development that became 4.15 started from that
> > > point.
> > > 
> > > Somewhere between
> > ... that point and ...
> > 
> > >   4.15/master (they are so alike it doesn't change
> > > much) this regressed, and we will find it.  I've got an idea for
> > > one
> > > thing it might be but only testing changes speculation into
> > > verification.
> > > 
> > > Also manual bisect testing is something our users can do that I
> > > don't
> > > have the time to handle right now, so it is incredibly valuable.
> > > 
> > > Confirming that 4.14.0rc1 works *in the test being done as the
> > > validation* is important, as otherwise we could be chasing the
> > > wrong
> > > thing as the decision basis.
> > > 
> > > I trust this clarifies,
> > > 
> > > Andrew Bartlett
> > > -- 
> > > Andrew Bartlett (he/him)       https://samba.org/~abartlet/
> > > Samba Team Member (since 2001) https://samba.org
> > > Samba Team Lead, Catalyst IT   
> > > https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba
> > > 
> > > Samba Development and Support, Catalyst IT - Expert Open Source
> > > Solutions
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
-- 
Andrew Bartlett (he/him)       https://samba.org/~abartlet/
Samba Team Member (since 2001) https://samba.org
Samba Team Lead, Catalyst IT   https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

Samba Development and Support, Catalyst IT - Expert Open Source
Solutions