BIND 10 #1515: crash bindctl with "config add Auth/datasources[0]/zones" twice
BIND 10 Development
do-not-reply at isc.org
Wed Jan 4 19:22:06 UTC 2012
#1515: crash bindctl with "config add Auth/datasources[0]/zones" twice
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: jreed | Owner: stephen
Type: | Status: reviewing
defect | Milestone:
Priority: | Sprint-20120110
critical | Resolution:
Component: bind- | Sensitive: 0
ctl | Sub-Project: DNS
Keywords: | Estimated Difficulty: 2
Defect Severity: N/A | Total Hours: 0
Feature Depending on Ticket: none |
Add Hours to Ticket: 0 |
Internal?: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by vorner):
* owner: vorner => stephen
Comment:
Hello
Replying to [comment:8 stephen]:
> '''src/lib/python/config/tests/ccsession_test.py'''[[BR]]
> test_add_remove_value: After "Spec2/item5" is added, is there any reason
that the following "assertEqual()" test is repeated?
No, not really, except maybe as an artefact of my experiments with the
test. I removed it.
> > However, I'm not sure if this is the correct fix. What is the reason
for not allowing a list to have two same items? Should we remove the check
and allow them instead?
> Would we be adding two identical items, or two references to the same
item? I think the latter would be counter-intuitive for users if they
subsequently change what they think is one instance and find the other one
has changed as well.
It would be adding two identical but independent items.
> > If not, this fix could have this changelog entry:
> I think a slight re-phrasing sounds better:
> {{{
> Fixed problem where bindctl crashed when a duplicate non-string item was
> added to a list. This error is now properly reported.
> }}}
OK
--
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/1515#comment:9>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development
More information about the bind10-tickets
mailing list