Sorry Jim, first time I looked into the diff I missed the standard_sub_basic call. Your change seem ok.
Thank for the explanation. Simo. On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 13:58, Jim McDonough wrote: > > > >Jim, this seem a semantic change, can you explain why you think > >allo_sub_basic should be used here?? > >What was the problem that made you change lp_string() ? > Yep, bug #117 was winbindd looping such that it could only be killed with > -9. How is this a semantic change other than substitutions done in parms > can now be longer than 100 chars total? > > The problem was that substituions using lp_string were limited to 100 chars > total. winbindd was trying to substitute a very large username (but it > wouldn't matter really, if it was just a long skeleton pathname). > standard_sub_basic is still broken, because it loops if any of the > sub_string() calls fail to increment the current location pointer. There > is no provision for failure, and you get a very tight loop. > > Do you see a problem with the substitutions? > > Jeremy, this is why I was tentative about changing it... > > ---------------------------- > Jim McDonough > IBM Linux Technology Center > Samba Team > 6 Minuteman Drive > Scarborough, ME 04074 > USA > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Phone: (207) 885-5565 > IBM tie-line: 776-9984 -- Simo Sorce - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Xsec s.r.l. - http://www.xsec.it via Durando 10 Ed. G - 20158 - Milano mobile: +39 329 328 7702 tel. +39 02 2399 7130 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
