make sure pre saml login is enabled after saml is disabled

[DaanHoogland]

Description

This PR...

Fixes: #12595

• On enabling SAML, the user's current Source is now saved (via the generic user_details key/value store, UserDetailsDao — the same mechanism UserPasswordResetManagerImpl and the OAuth2 login command already use) before it gets overwritten to SAML2. Skipped if already SAML2/SAML2DISABLED (nothing meaningful to remember), and guarded against a null source (an edge case I found via the pre-existing test).
• On disabling SAML with enable.login.with.disabled.saml=true, it now restores that saved source (e.g. LDAP) via a new getPreSamlSource helper, instead of hardcoding UNKNOWN. Falls back to UNKNOWN if nothing was ever recorded (pre-existing users from before this fix) or the stored value is unrecognized.

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• Build/CI
• Test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• Major
• Minor

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 61.29032% with 12 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 19.73%. Comparing base (5e5ae0c) to head (08f943d).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...g/apache/cloudstack/saml/SAML2AuthManagerImpl.java	61.29%	10 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #13953      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     19.72%   19.73%   +0.01%     
- Complexity    19941    19961      +20     
============================================
  Files          6371     6371              
  Lines        575738   575802      +64     
  Branches      70471    70479       +8     
============================================
+ Hits         113582   113656      +74     
+ Misses       449810   449792      -18     
- Partials      12346    12354       +8     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	3.41% <ø> (ø)
unittests	21.01% <61.29%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

🔴 Test Coverage Grade: D — Marginal

Metric	Value
Line coverage	24.61%
Branch coverage	18.82%

Grade Scale

Grade	Line Coverage	Meaning
🟢 A	≥ 80%	Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴
🟡 B	60-79%	Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉
🟠 C	40-59%	Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬
🔴 D	20-39%	Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖
⛔ F	< 20%	Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥

Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
2 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
41.6% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud