mirror of
https://github.com/samba-team/samba.git
synced 2025-01-18 06:04:06 +03:00
spelling fixes for 4.18 (errror implemenation proces Controler)
One of changes is somewhat interesting, it is "tfork waiter proces" process title in tfork.c. I wonder why no one noticed this before. There's another similar process title in there, "tfork waiter process(%d)". Hopefully no one does grep for "proces$" (and there's no reason to). Signed-off-by: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru> Reviewed-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org> Reviewed-by: Rowland Penny <rpenny@samba.org> Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org> Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Jan 26 20:46:11 UTC 2023 on atb-devel-224
This commit is contained in:
parent
2a104556e8
commit
96154a26fe
@ -395,7 +395,7 @@ static void ctdb_set_culprit_count(struct ctdb_recoverd *rec,
|
||||
struct ctdb_banning_state,
|
||||
len);
|
||||
if (t == NULL) {
|
||||
DBG_WARNING("Memory allocation errror");
|
||||
DBG_WARNING("Memory allocation error");
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
rec->banning_state = t;
|
||||
|
@ -747,7 +747,7 @@ PyDoc_STRVAR(py_smbconf_doc,
|
||||
"types. Future, write based functions need a writable backend (registry).\n"
|
||||
"\n"
|
||||
"Note that the registry backend will be provided by a different\n"
|
||||
"library module from the source3 tree (implemenation TBD).\n");
|
||||
"library module from the source3 tree (implementation TBD).\n");
|
||||
|
||||
static struct PyModuleDef moduledef = {
|
||||
PyModuleDef_HEAD_INIT,
|
||||
|
@ -572,7 +572,7 @@ static pid_t tfork_start_waiter_and_worker(struct tfork_state *state,
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* The "waiter" child.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
process_set_title("tfork waiter", "tfork waiter proces");
|
||||
process_set_title("tfork waiter", "tfork waiter process");
|
||||
|
||||
CatchSignal(SIGCHLD, SIG_DFL);
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -2551,7 +2551,7 @@ int main(int argc, const char **argv, char **envp)
|
||||
.argInfo = POPT_ARG_STRING,
|
||||
.arg = &string_arg,
|
||||
.val = OPT_CHANGE_SECRET_AT,
|
||||
.descrip = "Change shared secret at Domain Controler" },
|
||||
.descrip = "Change shared secret at Domain Controller" },
|
||||
{
|
||||
.longName = "ping-dc",
|
||||
.shortName = 'P',
|
||||
|
@ -2918,7 +2918,7 @@ done:
|
||||
* test SEC_FLAG_MAXIMUM_ALLOWED with not-granted access
|
||||
*
|
||||
* When access_mask contains SEC_FLAG_MAXIMUM_ALLOWED, the server must still
|
||||
* proces other bits from access_mask. Eg if access_mask contains a right that
|
||||
* process other bits from access_mask. Eg if access_mask contains a right that
|
||||
* the requester doesn't have, the function must validate that against the
|
||||
* effective permissions.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user