On 02/19/2014 10:58 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 03:13 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 21:10, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 11:58 AM, Adam Misnyovszki wrote:
Hi,
I reviewed this old patch:
If an error occurs in the start up sequence in ipactl start/restart,
all the services
On 02/19/2014 11:01 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 03:30 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 21:13, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 01:49 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
Hello list,
I just came across this page:
On 19.2.2014 23:01, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 03:30 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 21:13, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 01:49 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
Hello list,
I just came across this page:
On 20.2.2014 05:47, Darth Vader wrote:
Hi,
Changed when ntp sync's in ipa-client-install for the ticket below:
https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/3957
Thanks,
Gabe
Thank you very much for your patch! Somebody will review it.
Please be so kind and update Trac with information about
Hello,
I had this patch sitting around for some time but didn't get around to
polishing and submitting it lately.
The ticket was now claimed by rga (I assume that's the person who goes
by Darth Vader here?). I'm sharing the work hoping that it doesn't get
done twice.
On 20.2.2014 09:35, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 19.2.2014 23:01, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 03:30 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 21:13, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 01:49 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
Hello list,
I just came across this page:
On 02/19/2014 04:54 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 04:37:05PM +0100, Tomas Babej wrote:
Hi,
When restoring files from backup, we do use an incorrect order of
operations - we first restore SELinux context and then copy the
files from backup, when we need to do the exact
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
Through the review process, patches are getting shifted
On 02/19/2014 04:17 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 19.2.2014 14:45, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Hello,
This fixes https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4178
Thanks, ACK.
Thanks, pushed to master: 0824d12c95d840b1787743e8316b0bc0f7ba5284
--
Petr³
___
On 02/19/2014 04:54 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 04:37:05PM +0100, Tomas Babej wrote:
Hi,
When restoring files from backup, we do use an incorrect order of
operations - we first restore SELinux context and then copy the
files from backup, when we need to do the exact
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:20:12PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/19/2014 04:54 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
However: since this is about restoring a backup, can't the backup
contain the extended attributes, so that the SELinux context gets
restored to the original state (which could be
On 02/20/2014 12:57 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/19/2014 05:32 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/19/2014 10:44 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 08:02 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 09:42 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/13/2014 01:12 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Hello,
These patches
On 02/20/2014 12:58 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:20:12PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/19/2014 04:54 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
However: since this is about restoring a backup, can't the backup
contain the extended attributes, so that the SELinux context gets
restored
On 02/20/2014 01:06 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 12:57 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/19/2014 05:32 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/19/2014 10:44 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 08:02 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 09:42 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/13/2014 01:12 PM,
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to know
which patches are already reviewed and which are not reviewed.
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to know
which patches are
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to
On 02/20/2014 01:22 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is
reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit
message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
There is definitely a bug (or more) in ipa-pwd-extop in handling
authentication cases.
Some progress on this investigation.
Plugin precedence setting is broken in 389-ds. It is only set once,
before running init function provided by the plugin and
Hi,
I am now getting more familiar with PKCS#11 and did check which objects
are handled by softhsm and I think the best way would be a direct
mapping of a subset of the pkcs#11 objectclasses and attributes to LDAP.
In my understanding we would only need the objectclasses of storage
objects:
On 02/20/2014 01:22 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful
On 02/20/2014 01:36 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:22 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but
On 20.2.2014 13:31, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is
On 02/20/2014 02:02 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:31, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit
- Original Message -
From: Martin Kosek mko...@redhat.com
To: d...@redhat.com, Petr Spacek pspa...@redhat.com
Cc: freeipa-devel@redhat.com
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 9:18:37 AM
Subject: Re: [Freeipa-devel] [PATCH]Add -f option to ipactl
On 02/19/2014 10:58 PM, Dmitri Pal
On 20.2.2014 13:39, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi,
I am now getting more familiar with PKCS#11 and did check which objects
are handled by softhsm and I think the best way would be a direct
mapping of a subset of the pkcs#11 objectclasses and attributes to LDAP.
In my understanding we would only
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to know
which patches are
On 19.2.2014 17:55, Martin Basti wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 17:10 +0100, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 15:11, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 18.2.2014 17:34, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 17:06 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 04:45 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
Hello,
Add
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for
On 20.2.2014 14:31, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone
On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a
On 02/20/2014 02:15 PM, Adam Misnyovszki wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Martin Kosek mko...@redhat.com
To: d...@redhat.com, Petr Spacek pspa...@redhat.com
Cc: freeipa-devel@redhat.com
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 9:18:37 AM
Subject: Re: [Freeipa-devel] [PATCH]Add -f
On 02/20/2014 02:54 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:33 +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
There is definitely a bug (or more) in ipa-pwd-extop in handling
authentication cases.
Some progress on this investigation.
Plugin precedence setting is broken in 389-ds. It is only set
Sorry about that Petr. I got a little overzealous :) I can give it back
to you since you already have a patch in progress.
Gabe
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Petr Viktorin pvikt...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
I had this patch sitting around for some time but didn't get around to
- Original Message -
From: Martin Kosek mko...@redhat.com
To: Adam Misnyovszki amisn...@redhat.com, freeipa-devel@redhat.com
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 3:00:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Freeipa-devel] [PATCH]Add -f option to ipactl
On 02/20/2014 02:15 PM, Adam Misnyovszki wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag
Will do. Email okay since I am not on IIRC?
Thanks,
Gabe
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Martin Kosek mko...@redhat.com wrote:
No problem, we are all learning. The common rule is that when a ticket is
not
assigned to someone, i.e. free, it is better to ask the asignee on IRC
and
check
It would as well. But I think for short quick question like this one, the IRC
is better. If you do not have an IRC client configured on your machine you can
use freenode web interface:
http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=freeipa
It is quite easy to use.
Martin
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Gabe
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:36 +0100, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 17:55, Martin Basti wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 17:10 +0100, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 15:11, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 18.2.2014 17:34, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 17:06 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is
reviewing
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how
ooops! Missed that. Updated Trac.
Thanks,
Gabe
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:48 AM, Petr Spacek pspa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 20.2.2014 05:47, Darth Vader wrote:
Hi,
Changed when ntp sync's in ipa-client-install for the ticket below:
https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/3957
Thanks,
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:15:23AM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr
On 02/20/2014 03:42 PM, Adam Misnyovszki wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Martin Kosek mko...@redhat.com
To: Adam Misnyovszki amisn...@redhat.com, freeipa-devel@redhat.com
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 3:00:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Freeipa-devel] [PATCH]Add -f option to ipactl
On 02/20/2014 04:34 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu,
On 20.2.2014 14:20, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:39, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi,
I am now getting more familiar with PKCS#11 and did check which objects
are handled by softhsm and I think the best way would be a direct
mapping of a subset of the pkcs#11 objectclasses and attributes to
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:34 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:43 +0100, Tomas Babej wrote:
No. The only thing that happened automatically in Patchwork was that
entries got created. Patchwork doesn't even have threads - each
version of a patch needed to be individually marked as superseded.
Very much mindless clicking is
On 02/20/2014 04:55 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:34 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
Hi,
this patch fixes ticket https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4163
maximum serial number field now accepts only positive numbers
Thanks
Adam
From dd364e2bc41446854be966d0a09bf7bcde60c663 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Adam Misnyovszki amisn...@redhat.com
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:48:28
On 02/20/2014 12:39 PM, freeipa wrote:
#4185: Index plugin namespaces by classes
-+-
Reporter: pviktori |Owner: pviktori
Type: refactoring |
On 02/20/2014 06:47 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/20/2014 12:39 PM, freeipa wrote:
#4185: Index plugin namespaces by classes
-+-
Reporter: pviktori |Owner:
pviktori
On 02/20/2014 08:15 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:02 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:31, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we
On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 14:12 +0100, Petr Vobornik wrote:
On 13.1.2014 17:09, Petr Vobornik wrote:
Hi,
these patches implements the OTP Web UI.
Last 5 patches is the OTP UI.
First 6 patches is a little refactoring/bug fixes needed for them.
General password dialog is introduced to
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 09:19 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:33 +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
There is definitely a bug (or more) in ipa-pwd-extop in handling
authentication cases.
Some progress on this
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 14:13 +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
Through the review process, patches are getting shifted around, added,
deleted, etc. So I'm now just going to be posting all the patches as an
ordered set. The set attached is ordered
On 02/20/2014 12:57 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 06:47 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/20/2014 12:39 PM, freeipa wrote:
#4185: Index plugin namespaces by classes
-+-
Reporter: pviktori |
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 17:29 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Patchwork:
patch arrives: nothing
mark self as reviewer: use web interface
send review: reply, find patch in Patchwork, mark status
send fixed patch: send the mail, find patch in Patchwork, mark
status,
find old patch in
On 02/20/2014 04:41 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 16:34, Petr Viktorin wrote:
...
Note that Trac has XMLRPC so it is very very easy to have script for review
assignment etc.
$ start_review.py somerandomstring.patch
can very easily grep ticket URL and add your name to 'Reviewer' field in
On (20/02/14 15:09), Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:54 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is
reviewing
which
On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 15:59 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
In attempting to write an OTP synchronization client, I've noticed it
doesn't fit into the framework very well. The job of the client is to
perform the synchronization extended operation. The format of the
request is this:
On 20.2.2014 20:08, Martin Kosek wrote:
But I think a simple script like startreview.py some.patch that Petr
mentioned is a good start, few lines of code.
I have modified my push.py to start_review.py.
Clone
https://github.com/spacekpe/freeipa-processes.git
and read the commit message :-)
It
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
There is an error in libotp's find() function which assumes that
get_basedn() always returns non-NULL value. This is not true for at
least cn=Directory Manager.
Patch attached.
More fixes required, now that Thierry produced the fix for 389-ds
On 02/20/2014 10:32 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (20/02/14 15:09), Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:54 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other
68 matches
Mail list logo
