IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
S390. This is an attempt to avoid the panic we're seeing in the
automatic builds.
The main fixes are:
- assumptions that sizeof(size_t) == sizeof(int), mostly in printf formats
- use of NULL format statements to perform dn searches.
- assumption that sizeof() returns an int
The biggest change was fixing the RAW-CONTEXT test. It was forcing
capabilities to zero in an attempt to not negotiated extended
security, but as a side effect it was forcing negotiation of dos error
codes. This confused the hell out of the test code!
Also fixed a bunch of places incorrectly using NT_STATUS_V() instead
of NT_STATUS_EQUAL() and several places that had the wrong dos status
codes
less likely that anyone will use pstring for new code
- got rid of winbind_client.h from includes.h. This one triggered a
huge change, as winbind_client.h was including system/filesys.h and
defining the old uint32 and uint16 types, as well as its own
pstring and fstring.
This adds a pvfs_wait_message() routine which uses the new messaging
system, event timers and talloc destructors to give a nice generic
async event handling system with a easy to use interface. The
extensions to pvfs_lock.c are based on calls to pvfs_wait_message()
routines.
We now pass all of our smbtorture locking tests, although while
writing this code I have thought of some additonal tests that should
be added, particularly for lock cancel operations. I'll work on that
soon.
This commit also extends the smbtorture lock tests to test the rather
weird 0xEEFFFFFF locking semantics that I have discovered in
win2003. Win2003 treats the 0xEEFFFFFF boundary as special, and will
give different error codes on either side of it. Locks on both sides
are allowed, the only difference is which error code is given when a
lock is denied. Anyone like to hazard a guess as to why? It has
me stumped.