
aaron at engr
Mar 30, 2003, 1:17 PM
Post #4 of 6
(670 views)
Permalink
|
Or perhaps a few hours later ;-) There's still a major todo left, and that's that I wrote the auth_check_user_ext() function to work really well and nice, but forgot to take care of auth_check_user(). At this point, I don't understand the difference, except that one is used by injector.c and the other in pipe.c, respectively. Is the list returned by auth_check_user() really just the two lists, userids and forwards, from auth_check_user_ext() concatenated? If that's the case, let's just delete the auth_check_user() function and rewrite pipe.c to use _ext()... or to be lazy, do this: int auth_check_user( const char *address, struct list *userids, int checks ) { int occurences=0; int c1, c2 } int count1, count2; struct list templist1, templist2; struct element *tempelem1, *tempelem2; char tempchar[AUTH_QUERY_SIZE]; list_init( templist1 ); list_init( templist2 ); occurences = auth_check_user_ext( address, templist1, templist2, checks ); tempelem1 = list_getstart( templist1 ); count1 = templist1.total_nodes; for( c1 = 0; c1 < count1; c1++ ) { /* _ext() gives us a list of numeric user ids, so convert to char */ snprintf( tempchar, AUTH_QUERY_SIZE, "%llu", tempelem1->data ); list_nodeadd( userids, tempchar ); tempelem1 = tempelem1->nextnode; } tempelem2 = list_getstart( templist2 ); count2 = templist2.total_nodes; for( c2 = 0; c2 < count2; c2++ ) { list_nodeadd( userids, tempelem2->data ); tempelem2 = tempelem2->nextnode; } tempelem2 = list_getstart( templist2 ); } Aaron On Sun, 30 Mar 2003, Aaron Stone wrote: count2 = templist2.total_nodes;> Just finished a full rewrite, actually ;-) so the ldap sections are for( c2 = 0; c2 < count2; c2++ )> now internally abstracted and a few extra config options specifically with {> drop-in Exchange replacement in mind... now supported are external list_nodeadd( userids, tempelem2->data );> forwards through a Contact, and distribution groups (naturally, it's tempelem2 = tempelem2->nextnode;> recursive to allow a member of a I'm busy right now cleaning up all of the printf()'s I stuck everywhere. > Most will become trace(DEBUG) but a few were just to see the program flow. > There's also a 12 byte leak in auth_adduser, but I can't figure out what's > happening there; I've tried free()'ing everything in sight, but only get > segfaults :-( I guess the good news is that the daemons never call > auth_adduser() so it's practically a moot point. > > Thanks for asking, btw! I'll post the new version in a few days! > > Aaron > > > On 27 Mar 2003, Ryan Butler wrote: > > > On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 04:27, Roel Rozendaal - IC&S wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > i regret to admit that i have lost pretty much track of the LDAP auth > > > system :$ > > > > > > What's the status? Is it ready to be included in cvs? > > > > > > regards roel > > > > > > > > > ______ > > > > I think it is/was ready to be committed and once its in there, Myself > > and/or Jesse need to update autoconf to work with it. > > > > > > Ryan > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Dbmail-dev mailing list > > Dbmail-dev [at] dbmail > > http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dbmail-dev mailing list > Dbmail-dev [at] dbmail > http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev >
|