On 10/02/2015 12:43 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 12:29:01PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 08:44:11PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 08:39:15PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 08:31:50PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>>On (01/10/15 20:13), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>>>On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 07:49:23AM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>>>>There is a common agreement (at least from management side)
that we want
>>>>>>>to improve code coverage This patch is great opportunity to
add regression
>>>>>>>test. You can choose either integration test or unit test;
you should know
>>>>>>>what suits better to this case.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I tried to create a test (see my tests branch at fp.o) but
it's really
>>>>>>not easy, the sdap_async.c module has quite some dependencies and
the
>>>>>>generic search request is real pita to mock. And we need to apply
this
>>>>>>patch to downstream.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So while I agree with you we need tests, I think this one needs
to be
>>>>>>done together with the LDAP refactoring, sorry.
>>>>>What about integration test?
>>>>
>>>>Calling sdap_posix_check_send requires LDAP backend with ID mapping and
>>>>AD schema..
>>>
>>>Actually ID mapping should be disabled of course...
>>>
>>>So what we could do is start a test while the server only contains entry
>>>with a wrong POSIX data to make sure the request hits it and then add a
>>>correct entry and request it..
>>
>>Turns out that the test hits the POSIX check, but doesn't error out
>>with:
>> id_provider = ldap
>> ldap_schema = ad
>>
>>Because the code that triggers the next connection (and eventually marks
>>sssd as offline) is only in the AD provider.
>>
>>The WIP test can be found here:
>>
https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/jhrozek/public_git/sssd.git/commit/?h=intg_...
>>
>>So we really need Samba4 AD to test this..sorry, I'll push the patch w/o
>>tests.
>
>* master: 6735c0451d4e80d7cd4b480a8c1f7dafb2b536ea
Reviewed-by tag is missing.
Yes, sorry about that. Luckily it was Pavel Brezina's review and IIRC I
previously gave him one :-)