From 9d95f8704d4dab70d50290ebd1e3c0b8800261a7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Zach Loafman Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 11:06:51 -0700 Subject: s/NT_STATUS_WIN7_INVALID_RANGE/NT_STATUS_INVALID_LOCK_RANGE/g --- source4/torture/raw/lock.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'source4/torture/raw/lock.c') diff --git a/source4/torture/raw/lock.c b/source4/torture/raw/lock.c index 72a03e1623..7e3ac29809 100644 --- a/source4/torture/raw/lock.c +++ b/source4/torture/raw/lock.c @@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ static bool test_lockx(struct torture_context *tctx, struct smbcli_state *cli) lock[0].count = 2; status = smb_raw_lock(cli->tree, &io); if (TARGET_IS_WIN7(tctx)) - CHECK_STATUS(status, NT_STATUS_WIN7_INVALID_RANGE); + CHECK_STATUS(status, NT_STATUS_INVALID_LOCK_RANGE); else CHECK_STATUS(status, NT_STATUS_OK); lock[0].pid--; @@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ static bool test_lockx(struct torture_context *tctx, struct smbcli_state *cli) /* XXX This is very strange - Win7 gives us an invalid range when we * unlock the range even though the range is locked! Win7 bug? */ if (TARGET_IS_WIN7(tctx)) - CHECK_STATUS(status, NT_STATUS_WIN7_INVALID_RANGE); + CHECK_STATUS(status, NT_STATUS_INVALID_LOCK_RANGE); else { CHECK_STATUS(status, NT_STATUS_OK); status = smb_raw_lock(cli->tree, &io); -- cgit