summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/source/libsmb/unexpected.c
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* Move over to RELEASE branch.Jeremy Allison2002-02-011-4/+2
| | | | Jeremy.
* Sync-up with SAMBA_2_2 branch.Jeremy Allison2001-10-111-2/+2
| | | | Jeremy.
* Syncup getting ready for release.Jeremy Allison2001-07-061-2/+2
| | | | Jeremy.
* 1) added void* state argument to tdb_traverse. guess what! there wereLuke Leighton2000-02-041-10/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | two places i found where it was appropriate to _use_ that third argument, in locking.c and brlock.c! there was a static traverse_function and i removed the static variable, typecast it to a void*, passed it to tdb_traverse and re-cast it back to the traverse_function inside the tdb_traverse function. this makes the use of tdb_traverse() reentrant, which is never going to happen, i know, i just don't like to see statics lying about when there's no need for them. as i had to do in samba-tng, all uses of tdb_traverse modified to take the new void* state argument. 2) disabled rpcclient: referring people to use SAMBA_TNG rpcclient. i don't know how the other samba team members would react if i deleted rpcclient from cvs main. damn, that code's so old, it's unreal. 20 rpcclient commands, instead of about 70 in SAMBA_TNG.
* use a minimal hash size in the unexpected packet database. A largeAndrew Tridgell2000-01-051-1/+1
| | | | | hash is only useful when we fetch by key, not when we use tdb_traverse()
* added suppport for unexpected udp/138 packetsAndrew Tridgell2000-01-031-9/+16
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | I also fixed up the lookup_pdc_name() code so that it now works, even with a NT server that insists on replying to udp/138. The method I used to match packets was to use the mailslot string as a datagram ID. The true dgm_id doesn't work as NT doesn't set it correctly. uggh. PS: Jeremy, I had to change your code quite a bit, are you sure this worked with a Samba PDC?? The code looked broken, it got the offsets wrong in the SMB portion of the packet and filled in the IP incorrectly.
* the bulk of the unexpected packet handling code is in hereAndrew Tridgell2000-01-031-0/+160