On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 22:01 -0400, Coy Hile wrote:
> > On Apr 7, 2015, at 2:58 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 18:54 +, Coy Hile wrote:
> >> Quoting Simo Sorce :
> >>
> >
> >
> I guess that makes sense. Is it possible to add a user that simply
> doesn'
> On Apr 7, 2015, at 2:58 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 18:54 +, Coy Hile wrote:
>> Quoting Simo Sorce :
>>
>
>
I guess that makes sense. Is it possible to add a user that simply
doesn't have the posix attributes defined? In the particular case of
On 04/07/2015 10:22 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 14:16 +, coy.h...@coyhile.com wrote:
Quoting Simo Sorce
On Mon, 2015-04-06 at 21:16 -0400, Coy Hile wrote:
In MIT land, one can potentially have multiple instances tied (by
convention) to a given user (that is, that administ
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 18:54 +, Coy Hile wrote:
> Quoting Simo Sorce :
>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> I guess that makes sense. Is it possible to add a user that simply
> >> doesn't have the posix attributes defined? In the particular case of
> >> */admin, I would expect that user to login to the ipa ui
Quoting Simo Sorce :
>
>
I guess that makes sense. Is it possible to add a user that simply
doesn't have the posix attributes defined? In the particular case of
*/admin, I would expect that user to login to the ipa ui or to be
kinit'd to prior to running ipa administrative commands, but I shou
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 14:16 +, coy.h...@coyhile.com wrote:
> Quoting Simo Sorce
>
> > On Mon, 2015-04-06 at 21:16 -0400, Coy Hile wrote:
> >> In MIT land, one can potentially have multiple instances tied (by
> >> convention) to a given user (that is, that administratively one knows
> >> are t
y.
Does that question make more sense?
Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S® 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
Original message
From: Simo Sorce
Date:04/07/2015 08:52 (GMT-05:00)
To: coy.h...@coyhile.com
Cc: freeipa-users@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Freeipa-users] Creating arbitrary
On Mon, 2015-04-06 at 21:16 -0400, Coy Hile wrote:
> In MIT land, one can potentially have multiple instances tied (by
> convention) to a given user (that is, that administratively one knows
> are the same set of eyeballs). For example, I might have my normal
> user (hile), and I might have anothe
In MIT land, one can potentially have multiple instances tied (by convention)
to a given user (that is, that administratively one knows are the same set of
eyeballs). For example, I might have my normal user (hile), and I might have
another distinct MIT principal hile/admin used when I’m doing
