[Freeipa-devel] [PATCHES] Fix getkeytab operation

[Alexander Bokovoy]

On Thu, 20 Nov 2014, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>On Thu, 2014-11-20 at 09:12 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 12:36:45 +0200
>> Alexander Bokovoy <abokovoy at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 19 Nov 2014, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> > >----- Original Message -----
>> > >> From: "Alexander Bokovoy" <abokovoy at redhat.com>
>> > >[...]
>> > >
>> > >> Regarding the patchset itself:
>> > >>
>> > >> Patch 0001: fix 'wuld' in the commit message. The rest is fine.
>> > >
>> > >Fixed.
>> > >
>> > >> Patch 0002:
>> > >>  - ticket number is missing in the commit message
>> > >
>> > >Added.
>> > >
>> > >>  - perhaps, an instruction how to regenerate asn1 code can be made
>> > >> a Makefile target? We don't need to call it ourselves but this
>> > >> would simplify things in future
>> > >
>> > >Added make regenerate target to asn1c makefile
>> > >
>> > >>  - I'm little uncomfortable how ASN_DEBUG() output goes explicitly
>> > >> to stderr but I guess this is something we currently cannot
>> > >> override with DS-specific log printing, so no big deal right now
>> > >
>> > >ASN_DEBUG() is currently disabled as EMIT_ASN_DEBUG is undefined, we
>> > >can later provide a replacement ASN_DEBUG function to hook
>> > >debugging, but given the same code is used in both DS plugins and
>> > >ipa-getkeytab binary I did not want to assume anything, and how to
>> > >wire it up (if we even want to) should probably be discussed at a
>> > >later time.
>> > >
>> > >>  - any specific need to get asn1/compile committed? We don't
>> > >> commit it in the client code (ipa-client/compile).
>> > >
>> > >Added 'compile' to .gitignore in second patch
>> > >
>> > >> Patch 0003: OK
>> > >
>> > >Nothing changed here.
>> > >
>> > >I also remembered the patch naming policy :-) so new patch
>> > >names/numbers are 514,515,516, third revision.
>> > Thanks. The only complaint I have left is number of whitespace errors
>> > that git says are in the 515th patch.
>>
>> Yeah the autogenerated code is not a pretty sight style-wise, do we
>> want to run an automatic indenter on it ?
>> I was hesitant to do so, but I wouldn't mind adding that, if we feel
>> strongly about it.
>
>Let's please not try to correct autogenerated code.
I'm not tied to this but Simo now thinks it is better to run indenter in
the generator rule as this will give less problems in actual comparison
noise that git diff would give.

I'll make sure to talk back to asn1c author to see if we can improve its
generators upstream.


-- 
/ Alexander Bokovoy