On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:51:13PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 05:42:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 12:01 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 11:26:39PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 09:32:34PM +, Simo Sorce
On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 14:06 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
Looks good to me, I have only a minor nitpick, shouldn't the
ENOENT
error in sysdb_delete_recursive_op_done() be fatal ?
Given it should never happen, does it make sense to allow to
continue ?
Simo.
ok, it is now
On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 12:01 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 11:26:39PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 09:32:34PM +, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 19:40 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 01:39:21PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 05:42:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 12:01 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 11:26:39PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 09:32:34PM +, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 19:40 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 01:39:21PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
Hi,
this patch adds a recursive delete request to the sysdb API. It has the
same interface as sysdb_delete_entry, but does not delete the entry, but
its children.
bye,
Sumit
This is a new version of the patch which tries to
On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 19:40 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 01:39:21PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
Hi,
this patch adds a recursive delete request to the sysdb API. It has
the
same interface as sysdb_delete_entry, but does not delete the entry,
but
its children.
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 09:32:34PM +, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 19:40 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 01:39:21PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
Hi,
this patch adds a recursive delete request to the sysdb API. It has
the
same interface as
