Re: v5 [PATCH 6/6] nsswitch: use new internal API (callers)

[DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>]

Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> writes:
>>> On Feb 17 2021, DJ Delorie wrote:
>>>> If you're refering to the "Neither found" comment, it reaches that if
>>>> nsswitch.conf mentions neither the primary nor alternate service name.
>>>
>>> Does it?  How so?
>>
>> Er... we just tested for them?
>>
>>       /* If *NI is NULL, the database was not mentioned in nsswitch.conf.
>>          If *NI is not NULL, but *NI->module is NULL, the database was in
>>          nsswitch.conf but listed no actions.  We test for the former.  */
>
> Why do you think that comment is accurate?

I'm going to go with "because I wrote it" even though that sounds a bit
conceited.  I'll add "and it passed review" for bonus point.  And to
anticipate your next one-line response, "by reading the code".  And
after your reponse to that, "why don't you just tell me what you think
the solution is?" because these conversations take forever when you
don't explain yourself or include enough information for us to know what
you're thinking.

Please refer to the bottom of
https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/FilingBugs for a reminder about what
we like to see in bug reports.  A reproducer would have been nice.
Especially if it were in the form of an in-tree test case that
demonstrates the problem.