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.
On good thing about having more clear function interfaces
(and forcing callers to specify clearly what they want)
is that now I can execute following search:
git grep DSDB_FLAG_NEXT_MODULE | wc -l
This showed that DSDB_FLAG_NEXT_MODULE flag is about 6 times
more frequently used than DSDB_FLAG_OWN_MODULE.
So this should reduce branch prediction by six times
in this part of the code, right :)
this replaces "return LDB_ERR_OPERATIONS_ERROR" with "return ldb_operr(ldb)"
in places in the dsdb code where we don't already explicitly set an
error string. This should make is much easier to track down dsdb
module bugs that result in an operations error.
> [ 651/1946] Compiling dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/new_partition.c
> ../dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/new_partition.c: In function 'new_partition_add':
> ../dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/new_partition.c:195: warning: 'down_req' may be used uninitialized in this function
The "down_req" variable isn't used anymore.
These CARs need to be checked on password change and password reset operations.
Apparently the password attributes are not influenced by Write Property.
Single detele operations and modifications of dBCSPwd are let through to the
password_hash module. This is determined experimentally.
The schema refresh operation itself starts requests from the top of the LDB
modules stack (see call "dsdb_schema_set_attributes" - search operations).
This doesn't work well when these do perform "dsdb_get_schema" calls. Since the
new schema isn't marked as "refreshed" atm (but in fact it still is - we didn't
terminate the reload/refresh yet) we could perform other calls to
"dsdb_schema_refresh" and run into serious trouble (segfault).
After a patch proposal of Nadya and some reflection I think that it's really
worth to change all tests which need a "0" "minPwdAge" to set it manually and
reset the default afterwards.
So we can finally introduce the default "minPwdAge" on provision.
Patch proposal by: Nadya Ivanova
It was reported by aatanasov that we kept around one whole schema per
modification made. This does not fix that, but I hope moves us closer
to a fix
The most important part of the fix is that:
- if (schema_out != schema_in) {
- talloc_unlink(schema_in, ldb);
- }
was the wrong way around. This is now handled in the schema_set calls.
Andrew Bartlett
Although it is not currently used in implementation,
my intention is for callers to clearly state what
action they want to execute.
Currently when a caller wants to pass the call to the next
module in the chain, this flag is either omitted or 0 is used
(which is somewhat hacky, isn't it)
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
