[Samba] Problem after update version 4.15.0

[Ingo Asche]

Hi Andrew,

first step done (git revert...) so it's now 4.15.0pre1-GIT-12ba3d9d8f2.

Login is again working.

For the triple check that would be then
git checkout 997fbcbc902 and
git checkout 12ba3d9d8f2, right?

Can I do that at once or have I to build after both steps?

Regards
Ingo

Andrew Bartlett via samba schrieb am 13.10.2021 um 22:11:
> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>