Re: [Samba] [PATCH] Pet peave then-than

2006-06-06 Thread Gerald (Jerry) Carter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Michael Wood wrote:
 This patch fixes all the incorrect uses of then that I could
 find on the whole SAMBA_4_0 branch.
 
 i.e. it is relative to
 svn://svnanon.samba.org/samba/branches/SAMBA_4_0 at revision
 16046.

Hey Michael,

I you could resend this to me an atatchment (rather
than inline), I'll apply it.  Offlist is fine.  Thanks.





cheers, jerry
=
Samba--- http://www.samba.org
Centeris ---  http://www.centeris.com
What man is a man who does not make the world better?  --Balian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEhZvWIR7qMdg1EfYRAheyAKDl7SIZjbzJBSC60oD2sDlVSIGnsACfcbNA
FLUKbdGECMXJEvXVvfUG8YY=
=8VH2
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba


[Samba] [PATCH] Pet peave then-than

2006-06-05 Thread Michael Wood
This patch fixes all the incorrect uses of then that I could
find on the whole SAMBA_4_0 branch.

i.e. it is relative to
svn://svnanon.samba.org/samba/branches/SAMBA_4_0 at revision
16046.

Index: source/auth/ntlmssp/ntlmssp_sign.c
===
--- source/auth/ntlmssp/ntlmssp_sign.c  (revision 16046)
+++ source/auth/ntlmssp/ntlmssp_sign.c  (working copy)
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@
 #define SRV_SEAL session key to server-to-client sealing key magic constant
 
 /**
- * Some notes on then NTLM2 code:
+ * Some notes on the NTLM2 code:
  *
  * NTLM2 is a AEAD system.  This means that the data encrypted is not
  * all the data that is signed.  In DCE-RPC case, the headers of the
Index: source/lib/popt/popthelp.c
===
--- source/lib/popt/popthelp.c  (revision 16046)
+++ source/lib/popt/popthelp.c  (working copy)
@@ -678,7 +678,7 @@
/[EMAIL PROTECTED] fileSystem @*/
/[EMAIL PROTECTED] *str, *fp, fileSystem @*/
 {
-char * s = alloca(300);/* larger then the ascii set */
+char * s = alloca(300);/* larger than the ascii set */
 
 s[0] = '\0';
 /[EMAIL PROTECTED]@*/  /* FIX: W2DO? */
Index: source/lib/ldb/common/ldb_dn.c
===
--- source/lib/ldb/common/ldb_dn.c  (revision 16046)
+++ source/lib/ldb/common/ldb_dn.c  (working copy)
@@ -665,7 +665,7 @@
 
 /* copy specified number of elements of a dn into a new one
element are copied from top level up to the unique rdn
-   num_el may be greater then dn-comp_num (see ldb_dn_make_child)
+   num_el may be greater than dn-comp_num (see ldb_dn_make_child)
 */
 struct ldb_dn *ldb_dn_copy_partial(void *mem_ctx, const struct ldb_dn *dn, int 
num_el)
 {
Index: source/lib/ldb/modules/ldb_map.h
===
--- source/lib/ldb/modules/ldb_map.h(revision 16046)
+++ source/lib/ldb/modules/ldb_map.h(working copy)
@@ -34,9 +34,9 @@
  * that any upper layers will use.
  *
  * All local attributes will have to have a definition. Not all remote 
- * attributes need a definition as LDB is a lot less stricter then LDAP 
+ * attributes need a definition as LDB is a lot less strict than LDAP 
  * (in other words, sending unknown attributes to an LDAP server hurts us, 
- * returning too much attributes in ldb_search() doesn't)
+ * while returning too many attributes in ldb_search() doesn't)
  */
 
 struct ldb_map_context;
Index: source/lib/registry/reg_backend_nt4.c
===
--- source/lib/registry/reg_backend_nt4.c   (revision 16046)
+++ source/lib/registry/reg_backend_nt4.c   (working copy)
@@ -463,7 +463,7 @@
}
 
if ((*ret)-data.length  vk-data_length) {
-   DEBUG(1, (Read data less then indicated data length!\n));
+   DEBUG(1, (Read data less than indicated data length!\n));
}

return WERR_OK;
Index: source/lib/registry/registry.h
===
--- source/lib/registry/registry.h  (revision 16046)
+++ source/lib/registry/registry.h  (working copy)
@@ -103,11 +103,11 @@
WERROR (*num_values) (const struct registry_key *, uint32_t *count);
WERROR (*get_subkey_by_index) (TALLOC_CTX *, const struct registry_key 
*, int idx, struct registry_key **);
 
-   /* Can not contain more then one level */
+   /* Can not contain more than one level */
WERROR (*get_subkey_by_name) (TALLOC_CTX *, const struct registry_key 
*, const char *name, struct registry_key **);
WERROR (*get_value_by_index) (TALLOC_CTX *, const struct registry_key 
*, int idx, struct registry_value **);
 
-   /* Can not contain more then one level */
+   /* Can not contain more than one level */
WERROR (*get_value_by_name) (TALLOC_CTX *, const struct registry_key *, 
const char *name, struct registry_value **);
 
/* Security control */
Index: source/lib/registry/TODO
===
--- source/lib/registry/TODO(revision 16046)
+++ source/lib/registry/TODO(working copy)
@@ -29,6 +29,6 @@
  - support for adding/deleting keys
  - support for security descriptors
 
-- pass parsed paths around rather then strings (i.e. just a list of strings)
+- pass parsed paths around rather than strings (i.e. just a list of strings)
 - integrate various registry tools ?
 - finish new patchfile code
Index: source/lib/registry/man/regtree.1.xml
===
--- source/lib/registry/man/regtree.1.xml   (revision 16046)
+++ source/lib/registry/man/regtree.1.xml   (working copy)
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
 
paraThe regtree utility prints out all the contents of a 
Windows registry 

RE: [Samba] [PATCH] Pet peave then-than

2006-06-05 Thread Jonathan Johnson
It's spelled peeve, not peave.

Sorry, couldn't resist. :-)

-Jonathan Johnson
Sutinen Consulting, Inc.
www.sutinen.com

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Michael Wood
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 9:40 AM
To: samba@lists.samba.org
Subject: [Samba] [PATCH] Pet peave then-than


--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba