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.
management system I proposed on samba-technical a couple of days
ago. Essentially it is a very lightweight way for any code in Samba to
make IDL based rpc calls to anywhere else in the code, without the
client or server having to go to the trouble of setting up a full rpc
service.
It can be used with any of our existing IDL, but I expect it will
mostly be used for a new set of Samba specific management calls.
The LOCAL-IRPC torture test demonstrates how it can be used by calling
the echo_AddOne() call over this transport.
(This used to be commit 3d589a0995)
deferred reply is short-circuited immediately when the file is
closed by another user, allowing it to be opened by the waiting user.
- added a sane set of timeval manipulation routines
- converted all the events code and code that uses it to use struct
timeval instead of time_t, which allows for microsecond resolution
instead of 1 second resolution. This was needed for doing the pvfs
deferred open code, and is why the patch is so big.
(This used to be commit 0d51511d40)
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.
(This used to be commit 4395c0557a)
