On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 08:38:39PM +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> The comment approach sure would be good for corosync as there are plenty
> of areas that are not freed on exit. That's also why I didn't really
> bother with "just one more" kind of thing.
The important point is "is it fr
On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 11:07 -0700, Joel Becker wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 08:45:36AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> > Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> > >> @@ -150,6 +162,10 @@ void corosync_request_shutdown (void)
> > >> poll_stop (0);
> > >> totempg_finalize ();
> > >> coroi
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 08:45:36AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> >> @@ -150,6 +162,10 @@ void corosync_request_shutdown (void)
> >> poll_stop (0);
> >> totempg_finalize ();
> >> coroipcs_ipc_exit ();
> >> +
> >> + /*Remove uidgid_list*/
> >> +
Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
>> @@ -150,6 +162,10 @@ void corosync_request_shutdown (void)
>> poll_stop (0);
>> totempg_finalize ();
>> coroipcs_ipc_exit ();
>> +
>> + /*Remove uidgid_list*/
>> + corosync_remove_uidgid_list ();
>
> Is there really a need to free this
> > >
> > > The loader should make sure to filter the config entries to load only
> > > uidgid entries (maybe it's already there and I haven't noticed).
> >
> > Answered in some previous mail by Steve, that we don't care. But yes,
> > this can be done.
>
> I have probably missed Steven's email
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 09:23 +0200, Jan Friesse wrote:
> Fabio,
> >> +
> >> corosync_exit_error (AIS_DONE_EXIT);
> >> }
> >>
> >> @@ -482,12 +498,18 @@ static coroipcs_handler_fn_lvalue
> >> corosync_handler_fn_get (unsigned int service,
> >>
> >> static int corosync_security_valid (i
Fabio,
Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> I have few comments...
>
> On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 11:49 +0200, Jan Friesse wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> differences
>> between files
>> attachment
>> (corosync-support-for-uidgid-try2.patch)
>>
>> diff --git a/trunk/exec/main.c b/trunk/exec/main.c
>> inde
We decided on /etc/corosync as the dir, not /etc/ais for the uidgid.d
directory. Other then that looks good
regards
-steve
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 11:49 +0200, Jan Friesse wrote:
> Attached is second version of patch.
>
> Read from dir uses better name for function (no security but rather
> uidgi
Hi Jan,
I have few comments...
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 11:49 +0200, Jan Friesse wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> differences
> between files
> attachment
> (corosync-support-for-uidgid-try2.patch)
>
> diff --git a/trunk/exec/main.c b/trunk/exec/main.c
> index db22e96..2b4 100644
> --- a/trunk/exec/mai
Attached is second version of patch.
Read from dir uses better name for function (no security but rather
uidgid) so it's included too. Take it as a version, which will be
back-ported to RHEL 5.
Regards,
Honza
Steven Dake wrote:
> rename "security" as an objdb key to "uidgid".
>
> The uid || g
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 18:21 +0200, Jan Friesse wrote:
> Third question. I'm not sure, if I should implement some reloading stuff
> or not. Because in current implementation, ug_config.uid/gid are never
> reloaded, and only logstuff is reloaded.
>
> Fourth think. From my point of view. ug_config.ui
rename "security" as an objdb key to "uidgid".
The uid || gid should be valid, not requiring an and operation.
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 18:21 +0200, Jan Friesse wrote:
> Attached is first version of support for multiple security items (uid-gid).
>
> First question what I have. I'm currently testing
Attached is first version of support for multiple security items (uid-gid).
First question what I have. I'm currently testing uid and gid as a pair,
so user process must have gid and uid (not only uid or gid). Is that
correct, or you will rather see something, what will check uid OR gid?
(From my
13 matches
Mail list logo
