Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] Treat server names as case-insensitive in failover code

2010-04-23 Thread David O'Brien
Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On 04/22/2010 06:44 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> It didn't cause any issues, but I think hostnames should be treated as >> case-insensitive > > > It hasn't caused any issues YET. > > I agree, this should be case-inse

Re: [SSSD] pam_pkcs11.so is missing for LOCAL domain?

2010-04-23 Thread David O'Brien
Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On 04/21/2010 08:35 AM, David O'Brien wrote: >> Stephen Gallagher wrote: >>> On 04/21/2010 03:10 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote: On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:04 +1000, David O'Brien wrote: > Tomas Mraz wrote: >> On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 14:24 +1000, David O'Brien wrote: >

[SSSD] [PATCH] Make ldap simple bind asynchronous

2010-04-23 Thread Martin Nagy
Hi, here it is. I included some description in the commit log, it is necessary to read it in order to understand why I did some things this way. Any suggestions to make the patch better are most welcome. Martin >From 228bfdcc000e93be5908ef9ba28aee13385c258d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Martin Na

Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] Two enhancements for PAM client

2010-04-23 Thread Simo Sorce
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 10:17:23 +0200 Ralf Haferkamp wrote: > Am Donnerstag 22 April 2010 17:03:23 schrieb Sumit Bose: > > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 04:37:36PM +0200, Ralf Haferkamp wrote: > > > Am Donnerstag 22 April 2010 12:08:46 schrieb Sumit Bose: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > the two patches attac

Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] Make the handling of fd events opaque

2010-04-23 Thread Martin Nagy
On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 11:28 +0200, Sumit Bose wrote: > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:58:10PM +0200, Martin Nagy wrote: > > On 04/16/2010 12:22 PM, Sumit Bose wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > to support the current effort to make the LDAP provider more robust this > > > patch removes all the #ifdef HAVE_LD

[SSSD] [PATCH] Support SRV servers in failover

2010-04-23 Thread Jakub Hrozek
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [PATCH 1/2] Remove freed server_common entities from list We didn't hit this before as we never removed common entities. When using service requests, we remove the resolved fo_servers when we hit a timeout, so the server_common can be also removed. [P

Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] Make the handling of fd events opaque

2010-04-23 Thread Martin Nagy
On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 11:28 +0200, Sumit Bose wrote: > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:58:10PM +0200, Martin Nagy wrote: > > On 04/16/2010 12:22 PM, Sumit Bose wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > to support the current effort to make the LDAP provider more robust this > > > patch removes all the #ifdef HAVE_LD

Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] Make the handling of fd events opaque

2010-04-23 Thread Sumit Bose
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:58:10PM +0200, Martin Nagy wrote: > On 04/16/2010 12:22 PM, Sumit Bose wrote: > > Hi, > > > > to support the current effort to make the LDAP provider more robust this > > patch removes all the #ifdef HAVE_LDAP_CONNCB calls from the main code > > into a separate file which

Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] Two enhancements for PAM client

2010-04-23 Thread Ralf Haferkamp
Am Donnerstag 22 April 2010 17:03:23 schrieb Sumit Bose: > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 04:37:36PM +0200, Ralf Haferkamp wrote: > > Am Donnerstag 22 April 2010 12:08:46 schrieb Sumit Bose: > > > Hi, > > > > > > the two patches attached should fix #446 and #417 respectively. > > > > > > For #417 a diff

Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] Make the handling of fd events opaque

2010-04-23 Thread Martin Nagy
On 04/23/2010 12:21 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > 11 times out of 10, it's a bad idea to use inline explicitly. Modern > compilers will automatically optimize small functions into inline > where it is safe to do so. Yes, but gcc can't inline it if it is defined in another translation unit, altho