ehlo,
Attached patches are unit test for ticket https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2487
The ./nss-srv-tests passed with sssd-1.12.1.
LS
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:23:47AM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
ehlo,
Attached patches are unit test for ticket https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2487
The ./nss-srv-tests passed with sssd-1.12.1.
LS
From ee8a9a9d65f1ca71d945c95eb664d1ff7f04cfc5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lukas Slebodnik lslebodn@redhat.com Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 11:09:51 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] TESTS: Add function to purge optionf from confdb
Isn't it better to always set up and teardown the whole db instead of cherry-picking the right parameters?
On (20/11/14 14:01), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:23:47AM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
ehlo,
Attached patches are unit test for ticket https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2487
The ./nss-srv-tests passed with sssd-1.12.1.
LS
From ee8a9a9d65f1ca71d945c95eb664d1ff7f04cfc5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lukas Slebodnik lslebodn@redhat.com Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 11:09:51 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] TESTS: Add function to purge optionf from confdb
Isn't it better to always set up and teardown the whole db instead of cherry-picking the right parameters?
The purpose is to remove just some options from confdb and do not tuch sysdb.
rebased patches on top of the tatest prebzina's changes.
LS
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 03:54:40PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (20/11/14 14:01), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:23:47AM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
ehlo,
Attached patches are unit test for ticket https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2487
The ./nss-srv-tests passed with sssd-1.12.1.
LS
From ee8a9a9d65f1ca71d945c95eb664d1ff7f04cfc5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lukas Slebodnik lslebodn@redhat.com Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 11:09:51 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] TESTS: Add function to purge optionf from confdb
Isn't it better to always set up and teardown the whole db instead of cherry-picking the right parameters?
The purpose is to remove just some options from confdb and do not tuch sysdb.
I know what is the purpose, but it's wrong :-)
It's better if the tests are isolated and don't depend on one another.
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 04:47:10PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 03:54:40PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (20/11/14 14:01), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:23:47AM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
ehlo,
Attached patches are unit test for ticket https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2487
The ./nss-srv-tests passed with sssd-1.12.1.
LS
From ee8a9a9d65f1ca71d945c95eb664d1ff7f04cfc5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lukas Slebodnik lslebodn@redhat.com Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 11:09:51 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] TESTS: Add function to purge optionf from confdb
Isn't it better to always set up and teardown the whole db instead of cherry-picking the right parameters?
The purpose is to remove just some options from confdb and do not tuch sysdb.
I know what is the purpose, but it's wrong :-)
It's better if the tests are isolated and don't depend on one another.
To be more specific -- I would prefer if mock_confdb_domain() first deleted the whole confdb and then only added the specified params.
Then, if we need per-test parameters, the test itself calls confdb_add_whatever()
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org