On Sat, 2006-05-27 at 16:13 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 18:56 -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > Guillaume.Rousse> Third, the following patches still apply, but I got no
> > Guillaume.Rousse> clue about their usefulness: -
> >
> > Guillaume.Rousse> autofs-4.1.0-hesiod-bind.patch
> >
> > jmoyer> I'll do some digging on this one tomorrow.
> >
> > OK, it took me a while longer than expected to get to this. Sorry!
> >
> > The hesiod resolve patch is wanted. Actually, I think in v5 we can just
> > get rid of the old calls to hes_resolve.
> >
> > If you look at the implementation that currently is there in
> > lookup_hesiod.c,
> > it has some bugs. It will free a pointer that the library will
> > subsequently try to free, and it also leaks memory. This is, in part, due
> > to
> > the horrible definition of the interface at the time, I believe.
> >
> > At any rate, we should move to hesiod_init, hesiod_resolve, etc. It's
> > probably best to check that the hesiod library supports the new interfaces
> > at configure time. If not, just disable the building of the hesiod
> > modules.
> >
> > Ian, let me know what you think of the attached patch.
> >
>
> I've checked this out and ended up with this, the configure part is
> due to the change in configure.in:
>
Oops and this.
diff --git a/modules/lookup_hesiod.c b/modules/lookup_hesiod.c
index cf9331c..c4e4635 100644
--- a/modules/lookup_hesiod.c
+++ b/modules/lookup_hesiod.c
@@ -107,6 +107,9 @@ int lookup_mount(struct autofs_point *ap
/* Note: it is not clear to me how to distinguish between
* the "no search results" case and other failures. --JM */
warn(MODPREFIX "entry \"%s\" not found in map", name);
+ status = pthread_mutex_unlock(&hesiod_mutex);
+ if (status)
+ fatal(status);
return NSS_STATUS_NOTFOUND;
}
_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
