Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality\

2002-04-17 Thread Rafal Szczesniak
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Tim Potter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 09:15:44AM +0200, Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > > > All the rpc client routines send the request and receive the reply, > > > returning any useful data to the caller. If any subsequent calls are > > > required it's up to the caller

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality\

2002-04-17 Thread Tim Potter
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 09:38:23AM +0200, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote: > > get it right if I try to explain it. The entire buffer is always sent > > across the wire, even in the request when it isn't actually needed > > probably due to a bug in the IDL file. > > it's not a bug. the buffer is

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality\

2002-04-17 Thread Jean Francois Micouleau
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Tim Potter wrote: > In the spoolss stuff you make a subsequent call 100% of the time. (-: > > It's more a matter of flexibility. I'm trying to keep these libraries > as simple as possible by design. it's also a matter of keeping the layers separated and clear and clean.

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality\

2002-04-17 Thread Tim Potter
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 09:15:44AM +0200, Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > All the rpc client routines send the request and receive the reply, > > returning any useful data to the caller. If any subsequent calls are > > required it's up to the caller to do this. > > Hmmm, you're right, but subsequ

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-17 Thread Jean Francois Micouleau
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Tim Potter wrote: > > > All the rpc client routines send the request and receive the reply, > > returning any useful data to the caller. If any subsequent calls are > > required it's up to the caller to do this. > > Hmmm, you'

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-16 Thread Rafal Szczesniak
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Tim Potter wrote: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 02:52:01PM +0200, Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > > proper args to continue or finish the enumeration. It may be annoying to > > write such code in each place we use client side of enumeration, so I > > propose to write a "higher level

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-16 Thread Tim Potter
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 02:52:01PM +0200, Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > proper args to continue or finish the enumeration. It may be annoying to > write such code in each place we use client side of enumeration, so I > propose to write a "higher level" function which could take care of doing > it pro

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-16 Thread Rafal Szczesniak
On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > I would expect the current code comes pretty close already actually. > > I'll be interested to see what you actually need to change. OK. This is another fix to enumerationn code. Major changes: - fix for returned error codes during enumeration - c

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-14 Thread Andrew Bartlett
Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > > > Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > > > > > > is now in the tree. In particular > > > > this version works with NT4. > > > > > > That one I sent did not ? I've tried it and it was fine. > > > > It had my NT4 box in a spin as

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-14 Thread Rafal Szczesniak
On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > > > On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > > > > > Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > > > > > > > Here's the patch that adds server side of lsa_enum_trust_dom call to > > > > samba. Memory leak causing segfault to smbd in

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-14 Thread Andrew Bartlett
Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > > > Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > > > > > Here's the patch that adds server side of lsa_enum_trust_dom call to > > > samba. Memory leak causing segfault to smbd in some cases is already > > > fixed. Major changes include: >

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-14 Thread Rafal Szczesniak
On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > > > Here's the patch that adds server side of lsa_enum_trust_dom call to > > samba. Memory leak causing segfault to smbd in some cases is already > > fixed. Major changes include: > > That code (with some major changes)

Re: lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-14 Thread Andrew Bartlett
Rafal Szczesniak wrote: > > Here's the patch that adds server side of lsa_enum_trust_dom call to > samba. Memory leak causing segfault to smbd in some cases is already > fixed. Major changes include: That code (with some major changes) is now in the tree. In particular this version works with N

lsa_enum_trust_dom functionality

2002-04-11 Thread Rafal Szczesniak
Here's the patch that adds server side of lsa_enum_trust_dom call to samba. Memory leak causing segfault to smbd in some cases is already fixed. Major changes include: 1. tdb_search_keys() is the new utility function searching the keys that match given pattern. (tdbutil.c and tdbutil.h) 2.