On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 12:17 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On 07/13/2011 11:57 AM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> On 13.07.2011 12:56, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> On 07/13/2011 11:09 AM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>>> Now, there is one concern -- admittedly, my fault as I haven't mention
it:
>>> str(true) == 'True'
>>> str(false) == 'False'
>>>
>>> so they should be acceptable as well. You have them explicitly denied in
>>> the unit tests. Do we have any particular reason not to allow them?
>>>
>>> This is minor comment, other than that patches look good!
>>
>> No reason, my previous incarnation of the patch actually had
>> strcasecmp(str, "true") -- would that be preferable? Or would it be
>> better to only explicitly allow for instance true/True/TRUE?
>
> I'd vote for strcasecmp() way (as in UTF-8 that should be the same as
> for ASCII). I guess this is the case where some tolerance is good. ;)
>
Agreed. New patches attached.
Nack. Makefile.am is missing reference to sss_python.h, so 'make dist'
doesn't include it (and RPM generation fails).